Ml  II      I 


1920 


A 


Divisiofi  P  \q 


Section 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 
SALES  AGENTS 


NEW  YORK 

LEMCKE  &  BUECHNER 
30-32  East  2oth  Street 

LONDON 

HUMPHREY  MILFORD 
Amen  Corner,  E.C. 

SHANGHAI 

EDWARD  EVANS  &  SONS,  Ltd. 
30  North  Szechuen  Road 


ttu 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  ORIENTAL  STUDIES 
VOL.  XV. 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

(Al-Fark  Bain  al-Firak) 

BEING  THE 

HISTORY  OF  THE  VARIOUS  PHILOSOPHIC  SYSTEMS 
DEVELOPED  IN  ISLAM 

BY 

abu-Mansur   'abd-al-Kahir   ibn-Tahir 
ai-Baghdadi  (d.  1037) 

PART  I 

TRANSLATED   FROM   THE   ARABIC 
BY 

KATE  CHAMBERS  SEELYE,  Ph.D. 


ma 


N*ro  fork 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 
1920 

All  rights  reserved 


Copyright,  1920 
By  Columbia  University  Press 


Printed  from  type,  January,  1920 


NOTE 

The  translation  of  a  work  from  one  language  into  an- 
other is  always  a  job  more  or  less  thankless.  It  is  difficult 
to  satisfy  the  masters  at  each  end  of  the  line.  This  is  the 
case  particularly  when  the  languages  are  as  distant  philo- 
logically  one  from  the  other  as  is  English  and  Arabic.  The 
translator  desires  to  reach  lucidity  of  statement;  at  the 
same  time  he  wishes  to  reproduce  his  author's  words  with 
as  felicitous  precision  as  is  possible.  Between  these  two 
ideals  he  may  fail  to  adjust  himself  with  that  nicety  that 
reveals  the  master  hand. 

It  is  not  for  me  to  judge  in  how  far  Mrs.  Seelye  has 
steered  clear  of  the  rocks  in  her  path ;  yet  I  venture  to  say 
that  her  translation  gives  a  very  fair  picture  of  the  original. 
The  subject  which  was  the  theme  of  al-Baghdadi — the  Con- 
formity or  the  non-Conformity  of  Mohammedan  religious 
and  philosophic  sectaries  —  is  an  abstruse  one  at  best.  But 
it  has  its  especial  interest.  The  history  of  Mohammedan 
thought,  as  the  theories  of  the  Greek  metaphysicians  are 
embroidered  on  to  the  dogmas  of  Islam — is  of  sufficient  in- 
terest to  the  general  student  of  the  world's  intellectual  effort 
to  warrant  the  attempt  to  do  for  al-Baghdadi  what  has 
already  been  done  for  the  two  other  scholars  of  his  age, 
Ibn  Hazm  and  al-Sharastani  and  to  render  his  work  acces- 
sible to  the  student  who  cannot  read  him  in  his  Arabic 
original. 

In  putting  out  this  first  part  of  al-Baghdadi's  Compen- 
dium, it  ought  to  be  remembered  that  the  text  as  published 
in  1 910  by  Muhammad  Badr  is  not  in  prime  condition.     It 


NOTE 


is  based  upon  one  single  manuscript;  and,  even  with  the 
corrections  suggested  by  the  master-hand  of  Ignaz  Gold- 
ziher,  it  does  not  always  inspire  in  the  reader  a  robust  con- 
fidence. 

In  her  Introduction,  Mrs.  Seelye  has  endeavored  to  point 
out  the  difference  in  the  form  of  presentation  that  distin- 
guishes al-Baghdadi  from  Ibn  Hazm  and  al-Sharastani.  We 
may  not  care  to  believe  that  our  author  has  achieved  a  won- 
derful performance;  but  he  has,  at  least,  given  us  some  in- 
teresting material.  He  was  learned  and  a  much-read  man ; 
and  though  his  point  of  view  is  strictly  conservative,  it  is 
one  that  has  to  be  taken  into  account,  if  we  wish  to  under- 
stand the  various  influences  that  have  moulded  the  great 
Mohammedan  world.  I  wish  to  join  Mrs.  Seelye  in  ac- 
knowledging the  assistance  she  has  received  from  both  Dr. 
Philip  Hitti  and  Professor  Talcott  Williams  in  helping  her 
over  many  a  difficult  problem. 

Richard  Gottheil. 

Columbia  University,  May  31,  1919. 


VI 


CONTENTS 


Note   v 

Introduction i 

Translation    19 

Part  I 21 

Chapter  I.        The  Divisions  of  the  Moslem  Community 21 

Part  II 25 

Chapter  I.        Explanation  of  the  Idea 27 

Chapter  II.      The  Division  into  Sects 31 

Part  III 41 

Chapter  I.        The  Sects  of  the  Rawafid 43 

Chapter  II.      The  Sects  of  the  Kharijlyah 74 

Chapter  III.     The  Doctrines  of  the  Erring  Sects  among  the 

Mu'tazilite  Kadarlyah 116 

Bibliography   211 

Index 215 

vii 


INTRODUCTION 

Of  Islamic  Sects  in  General 

To  the  student  who  first  looks  into  the  tenets  of  the 
.Moslem  religion,  the  simplicity  of  the  creed  accepted  by  all 
who  profess  Islam,  would  imply  a  remarkable  unity  in  this 
religion.  He  might  at  first  be  tempted  to  compare  it,  with 
favorable  results  for  Islam,  to  Christianity  with  its  many 
sects  and  denominations.  Even,  when,  after  a  little  fur- 
ther study,  he  found  that  there  was  one  great  schism  in 
Islam,  the  one  which  divides  the  Shiites  and  the  Sunnites, 
he  could  still  marvel  at  a  religion  of  but  two  sects.  But 
once  face  to  face  with  the  tradition,  'k  The  Jews  are  divided 
into  71  sects,  and  the  Christians  are  divided  into  72  sects, 
and  my  people  will  be  divided  into  73  sects,"  his  marveling 
would  cease,  and  his  first  impulse  would  naturally  be  to 
condemn  a  religion  which  justified  its  schisms  by  a  tradi- 
tion said  to  come  down  from  the  prophets.  The  fact  of  the 
matter  is,  that  instead  of  the  tradition  being  invented  to 
justify  the  sect,  the  sects  have  been  invented  to  justify  the 
tradition.  In  other  words,  claiming  that  Mohammed  had 
said  that  Islam  would  be  divided  into  73  sects,  many  of  the 
theologians  of  Islam  felt  it  incumbent  upon  them  to  bring 
about  the  fulfilment  of  this  prophecy,  and  therefore  set  to 
work  to  make  a  more  or  less  arbitrary  division  of  the  re- 
ligious system.  We  must  not,  however,  conclude  from  this 
that  all  but  the  two  sects,  the  Shiites  and  the  Sunnites,  owe 
their  origins  to  the  imaginings  of  the  theologians.  Many 
sects  exist  which  represent  important  philosophical  schools 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

and  widely  differing  trends  of  thought.  It  is  when  these 
are  subdivided,  to  bring  up  their  number  to  73,  that  the 
arbitrariness  appears, 

In  his  article  entitled  Le  denombrement  des  sectes  Ma- 
hometanes,  which  appeared  in  the  Revue  de  VHistoire  de  la 
Religion,  vol.  26,  Goldziher  offers  an  explanation  for  the 
origin  of  this  rather  extraordinary  saying  attributed  to 
Mohammed.  He  tells  how  allusions  to  this  division  by 
European  authors  are  to  be  found  as  early  as  the  sixteenth 
century.  Martinus  Crucius  in  his  Turco-Graeciae  libri  octo, 
Bale,  1587,  p.  66,  says:  "  Superstitio  Mohametana  est  in 
LXXII  principales  sectas  divisa,  quarum  una  sola  in  Para- 
disum  dux  est,  reliquae  vero  in  inferos."  Some  traditions 
give  the  number  as  72  instead  of  73.  Ibn  Maja  (d.  283) 
gives  1  three  versions  of  this  saying  of  the  prophet :  In  one 
it  is  only  the  Jews  who,  with  their  71  sects,  are  opposed  to 
the  future  division  of  Islam  into  72  sects,  the  Christians  not 
even  being  mentioned;  in  another,  in  opposition  to  the  73 
sects  of  Islam,  the  Jews  are  mentioned  with  71,  and  the 
Christians  with  72  sects,  of  which  one  shall  go  to  heaven, 
while  the  rest  are  condemned  to  hell;  in  the  third  version, 
the  71  Jewish  sects  alone  are  opposed  to  Islam.  Palgrave 
suggested  that  the  idea  of  the  72  sects  came  from  the  New 
Testament  account  of  Our  Lord's  72  disciples.  Goldziher's 
suggestion  is  that  this  tradition  is  an  erroneous  interpreta- 
tion of  a  word  which  originally  meant  something  quite  dif- 
ferent, this  wrong  interpretation  having  changed  the  primi- 
tive form.  In  other  words,  "  Shu'ab,"  branches,  a  term 
applied  very  generally  to  the  various  ramifications  of  an 
idea,  came  to  mean  "  Firkah,"  division,  and  thus  sect.  The 
tradition  which  has  become  thus  misinterpreted  is,  accord- 

1  Abu-'Abdallah  Muhammad  ibn-Yazld  ibn-Maja  al-Kazwini.  Cf. 
Brockelmann,  Arabische  Litteratur,  vol.  i,  p.  163.  De  Slane,  ibn-Khalli- 
kan,  Biographical  Dictionary,  vol.  ii,  p.  680. 

2 


INTRODUCTION 

ing  to  Goldziher,  the  one  quoted  by  the  great  traditionalist 
Bukhari1  (194-256/810-870),  "  Faith  has  60  and  some 
branches,  and  modesty  is  one  branch  of  faith  "  (Le  rec.  des 
trad.  Mah.,  ed.  Lud.  Krehl,  vol.  i,  p.  2).  This  same  tradi- 
tion appears  a  little  later,  as  follows :  "  Faith  has  70  and 
more  branches,  of  which  the  highest  is  the  belief  that  there 
is  no  God  but  Allah,  and  of  which  the  lowest  is  the  taking- 
out  of  the  oath  what  is  to  be  rejected;  and  modesty  is  a 
branch  of  faith"  (Muslim,  Sahih,  ed.  Cairo  1288  A.  H.,  vol. 
i,  p.  126)  .2  This  use  of  the  word  branch  gradually  came  to 
have  the  meaning  of  branching  off,  dividing;  and  finally 
firkah  having  been  substituted  for  "  Shu'ab,"  we  have  the 
tradition  of  the  y2  or  73  sects. 

Other  rather  interesting  explanations  of  this  arbitrary 
division  are  to  be  found  in  Steinschneider's  article  in  Z.  D. 
M.  G.,  vol.  iv,  p.  147.  Here  the  suggestion  is  made  that  it 
can  be  traced  back  to  the  Jewish  tradition  about  Moses  and 
the  70  elders ;  that  Moses  chose  six  elders  from  each  tribe, 
except  Levi,  which  being  a  model  tribe  would  not  take 
offense  if  slighted,  and  was  therefore  asked  for  only  four 
representatives,  Moses  himself  constituting  the  seventy-first 
elder.  This  number  the  Mohammedans  must  increase ;  and 
they  therefore  claim  73  sects.  Another  view  is  that  the 
origin  is  astronomical,  while  a  third  derives  it  from  the  70 
languages  of  the  Tower  of  Babel;  and  a  fourth  from  the 
J2  letters  in  Allah's  name,  a  tradition  drawn  from  the  Jew- 
ish legend  of  the  y2  letters  with  which  Yahweh  will  free 
the  children  of  Israel. 

Disagreements  over  this  hadlth  have  not,  however,  been 
limited  to  the  question  of  the  number.  One  of  the  greatest 
points  of  difference  was  the  question  of  how  many  of  these 

1  Ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  594. 

2  One  of  three  great  traditionalists  of  the  ninth  century.  Cf.  ibid., 
vol.  iv,  p.  391. 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

sects  would  be  saved.  Some  held  (among  them  our  author, 
Baghdad!)  that  all  would  be  damned  except  one,  the  ortho- 
dox Sunnite  sect ;  others  held  that  all  would  be  saved  except 
one ;  while  still  others,  and  among  them  leading  men,  denied 
the  tradition  altogether.  Of  this  group,  one  of  the  greatest 
was  Fakhr  al-DIn  al-Razi  the  great  preacher  1  (d.  1209) .  In 
his  commentary  on  the  Koran  (Surah  21,  v.  93)  he  says: 
"  The  authenticity  of  this  tradition  has  been  attacked,  and  it 
has  been  observed  that  if  by  the  72  sects  are  meant  as  many 
divergencies  of  the  fundamental  dogmas  of  religion,  there 
are  not  as  many  existing;  but  if,  on  the  contrary,  it  is  a 
question  of  secondary  teachings  (derived  from  these  fun- 
damental doctrines),  there  are  more  than  twice  as  many. 
Besides,  some  are  to  be  found  giving  quite  the  opposite  of 
the  text  which  is  generally  admitted :  that  all  the  sects  will 
go  to  paradise,  one  only  to  hell."  Maf&tlh  al-ghaib  [Keys 
of  the  mysterious  world],  vol.  vi,  p.  193.  Some  others 
who  disregard  the  tradition  go  to  the  other  extreme.  Mak- 
rizi,2  for  instance,  claims  that  the  Rafidfyah  are  divided 
into  300  sects.  Ibn-Hazm  holds  that  many  of  these  sects 
arose  as  followers  of  false  prophets,  clever  politicians  and 
mystics.  As  an  example  of  the  cleverness  of  some  of  the 
leaders,  he  mentions  abu-Mughith  al-Husain  al-Hallaj,8 
who  appeared  to  his  companions  as  God,  to  the  princes  as  a 
Shiite,  and  to  the  people  as  a  pious  Sufi.  In  this  connection 
it  is  interesting  to  note  how  often  the  leader  of  a  new  sect 
is  a  mania  or  freed  slave. 

Shahrasta.nl,  Baghdad!,  and  ibn-Tahir,  as  orthodox  Sun- 
nites  cling  to  the  hadith,  and  strive  to  whip  the  various  sects 
into  line,  cutting,  inserting,  and  combining,  till  they  reach 

1  Clement  Huart,  Littcrature  Arabe,  p.  317. 
3  Ibid.,  p.  355. 

3  Mystic  who  was  executed  in  921  (ibid.,  p.  269). 

4 


INTRODUCTION 

the  number  of  73.     Ibn-Hazm,  on  the  other  hand,  disre- 
gards the  hadtth  altogether. 

The  various  Aral)  writers  who  take  up  the  matter  of  the 
sects  within  the  "  Ummat  al-Islam"  (the  community  of 
Islam)  naturally  differ  in  their  manner  of  grouping  the 
sects.  Of  these  writers,  the  three  whom  we  are  going  to 
consider,  Baghdad!,  Shahrastani  and  ibn-Hazm,  although 
differing  in  details,  agree  more  or  less  in  the  main  divisions. 
Being  orthodox  Sunnites  themselves,  they  cannot  disagree 
about  that  sect.  The  unorthodox  they  divide  as  follows: 
Shahrastani  groups  them  under  the  four  main  headings: 
Kadariyah,  Sifatiyah,  Khawarij,  and  Shiite.  Ibn-Hazm: 
Mu'tazilah  (much  the  same  as  the  Kadariyah),  Murji'ah, 
Kharijiyah  and  Shiite.  Baghdad! :  Kadariyah,  Kharijryah, 
Murji'ah,  Shiite.  In  the  subdivision  of  the  Shiites,  which  is 
the  next  most  important  sect  to  the  Sunnites.  Shahrastani 
gives  the  following  divisions:  Kaisanlyah,  (4),  Zaidlyah 
(3),  Imamlyah  (1),  Ghulat  (10),  Isma'iliyah  (1);  total 
19.  Ibn-Hazm  gives  only  two  subdivisions,  the  Zaidiyah 
and  the  Imamlyah  (or  Rafidiyah).  Baghdad!:  Zaid!yah?«'< 
(|),  Kaisanlyah  (?),  Imamlyah  (15)  ;  total  20.  The  Ghu- 
lat he  excludes  entirely  from  the  Ummat  al-Islam. 

This  gives  a  little  idea  of  the  differences  abounding  over 
this  subject,  and  the  more  or  less  arbitrary  character  of  the 
whole  proceeding.  A  carefully  tabulated  list  of  Baghdadi's 
divisions  will  be  found  at  the  end  of  this  introduction. 

As  we  have  already  noted,  the  reasons  given  for  the 
branching  off  of  the  numerous  sects  vary  greatly.  Some  of 
the  sects  are  of  political  origin,  others  have  really  to  do 
with  some  of  the  fundamental  beliefs  of  Islam,  while  still 
others  are  based  merely  on  quibbling.  An  example  of  the 
greatest  political  division  is  to  be  found  in  the  separation 
of  the  Shiites,  which  was  due  to  the  disagreement  over  'AH. 
The  Shiites  claim  that  'All  was  martyred  by  Mu'awiyah  and 

5 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

that  his  descendants  alone  are  to  be  regarded  as  legitimate 
Imams.  By  some  'All  was  even  regarded  as  divine.  We 
read  of  one  sect  whose  leader  having  addressed  'AH  as  a 
God,  was  put  to  death  by  the  latter  and  his  following  perse- 
cuted. Till  lately  the  opinion  has  been  held  that  the  attitude 
taken  by  the  Shiites  with  regard  to  'AH  was  greatly  influ- 
enced by  Persian  mysticism,  and  the  Persian  conception  of 
a  ruler  as  more  or  less  divine.  This  opinion  has,  however, 
been  questioned  by  Goldziher.  The  tendency  to  regard 
'AH  as  a  God  naturally  increased  after  his  death.  To  the 
orthodox  Sunnite,  clinging  to  the  creed.,  "  There  is  no  God 
but  Allah,  and  Mohammed  is  the  prophet  of  Allah,"  such  a 
view  is  little  short  of  blasphemy.  Once  divided  on  this 
point,  these  two,  the  Sunnite  and  the  Shiite,  developed 
apart  from  each  other,  and  include  in  the  ramifications  of 
their  numerous  sects  almost  every  conceivable  view.  The 
main  divisions  of  the  Shiites  have  already  been  given ;  the 
Sunnites  recognize  no  sects  within  the  orthodox  fold,  but 
are  divided  into  the  four  great  schools,  each  of  which  recog- 
nizes the  other.  These  are  the  Hanifite,  the  Malikite,  the 
Shafiite,  and  the  Hanbalite. 

With  such  an  array  of  sects  as  the  above  statements  in- 
dicate, we  are  led  to  wonder  what  were  some  of  the  causes 
for  disagreement.  The  average  student  of  Islam  is  likely 
to  imagine  that  every  Moslem  must  accept  the  Koran  as 
infallible.  After  a  glance  at  some  of  the  Islamic  works  on 
sects,  however,  it  is  apparent  that  the  only  thing  upon  which 
all  Moslems  agree  is  the  creed :  "  There  is  no  God  but 
Allah,  and  Mohammed  is  the  prophet  of  Allah."  Every- 
thing aside  from  this  has,  at  some  time  or  other,  been 
attacked  by  some  scholar  or  leader.  If  these  men  limited 
themselves  to  attacking  or  arguing  over  questions  really 
vital  to  Islam,  such  as  the  necessity  for  daily  prayers,  the 
pilgrimage,  the  giving  of  alms,  etc.,  a  Mohammedan  work 

6 


INTRODUCTION 

on  sects  might  prove  most  interesting  reading.  As  a  mat- 
ter of  fact,  these  subjects  seem  to  occupy  them  far  less 
than  their  hair-splitting  quibbles  over  the  question  of 
whether  Allah  touches  his  throne  or  not,  whether  a  man  is 
a  believer,  an  unbeliever  or  a  heretic,  whether  an  interrupted 
prayer  is  acceptable,  etc.  These  discussions  strongly  re- 
semble in  pettiness  the  scholastic  debates  of  the  mediaeval 
Christian  Church,  regarding  the  number  of  angels  able  to 
stand  on  a  pin-point  at  one  time,  or  the  consequences  at- 
tending a  mouse's  eating  the  consecrated  host.  The  result 
is  rather  dull  reading,  and  at  times  appears  not  only  dull 
but  exceedingly  childish. 

Al-Baghdadi 

Accounts  of  Baghdadi's  life  are  to  be  found  in  the  fol- 
lowing works : 

De  Slane,  Ibn-Khallik&n,  vol.  ii,  p.  149. 
Subki,Tabakat  al-Shafi'lyah,  vol.  iii,  p.  238. 
Wiistenfeld,  Die  Shafiiten,  no.  345  ;  Abhandlung.  der 

Ges.  der  Wiss.  Gottingen,  vol.  37,  p.  345. 
Brockelmann,  Geschichte  der  Arab.  Lit.,  vol.  i,  p.  385. 
Friedlander,  /.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  28,  p.  26. 
Goldziher,  Vorlesimgen  iiber  den  Islam,  p.  160;  Z. 

D.  M.  G.,  vol.  65,  p.  349. 
Encyclopedia  of  Islam,  under  Baghdad!. 

Abu  Mansur  'Abd  al-Kahir  ibn-Tahir  ibn-Muhammad 
al-Baghdadl  (d.  ^29/1037),  was,  according  to  ibn-al-Salah, 
the  son  of  Tahir  ibn-Muhammad  al-Baghdadl  (d.  283). 
Subki,  who  quotes  ibn-al-Salah,  however,  is  not  sure  of  this 
statement,  he  merely  gives  it  for  what  it  is  worth  (Subki, 
Tabakat  al-Shafi'lyah,  vol.  ii,  p.  228). 

'Abd  al-Kahir  was  a  native  of  Baghdad,  but  while  still 
young  went  with  his  father  to  Nisapur  where  he  studied 

7 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

numerous  sciences.  Subki,  in  his  long  account  of  him 
{Tabakat  al-Shafi'lyah,  vol.  iii,  p.  238),  says  he  was  versed 
in  17  sciences.  He  became  especially  famous  for  his  skill 
in  arithmetic,  although  theology  attracted  him  most.  He 
was  a  pupil  of  abu-Ishak  al-Isfara'ini,  whom  he  succeeded 
after  the  latter's  death  in  418  (1027)  as  teacher  and  leader. 
The  revolt  of  the  Turkomans,  however,  forced  him  to  leave 
the  town  in  429  (1037)  and  take  refuge  in  Isfarain.  But 
the  joy  of  the  natives  of  this  town  at  having  such  an  emi- 
nent scholar  in  their  midst  was  short-lived,  for  he  died 
there  that  same  year  and  was  buried  by  the  grave  of  his 
former  teacher  abu-Ishak. 

Ibn-Khallikan  tells  us  that  the  haHz,  kAbd-al-Ghaffar  al- 
Faris,  mentions  him  in  the  Siyak,  or  continuation  of  the 
History  of  Nisapur,  and  says :  "  He  came  to  Nisapur  with 
his  father,  and  possessed  great  riches,  which  he  spent  on 
the  learned  (in  the  law)  and  on  the  Traditionalists.  He 
never  made  his  information  a  source  of  profit.  He  com- 
posed treatises  on  different  sciences  and  surpassed  his  con- 
temporaries in  every  branch  of  learning,  seventeen  of  which 
he  taught  publicly."  The  longest  account  of  him  is  to  be 
found  in  Subki's  Tabakat,  where  almost  a  page  is  devoted 
to  a  list  of  his  many  virtues  and  accomplishments.  His 
generosity  is  especially  noted;  and  a  rather  amusing  poem 
of  his,  on  his  poverty-stricken  condition  due  to  this  gener- 
osity is  quoted.  Subki  divided  the  followers  of  the  great 
leader  al-Ash'ari  (vol.  ii,  p.  25)  into  seven  ranks,  placing 
Baghdad!  in  the  third  rank.  Fakhr  al-Din  al-RazT  1  also 
mentions  him  in  his  "Al-Rvyad  al-Miicallakah"  {Hanging 
Gardens) . 

According  to  Subki's  account  he  was  a  voluminous  writer. 
In  fact,  he  devotes  an  entire  half-page  to  a  list  of  his  writ- 

1Ibn-Khallikan,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  652. 
8 


INTRODUCTION 

ings,  which  number  nineteen.  And  even  in  as  long  a  list 
as  this  he  omits  some  which  Baghdad!  himself  mentions  in 
his  Fark.     The  following  are  the  most  important : 

Al-Fark  bain  al-Firak  (the  work  under  considera- 
tion). 

Kitab  al-Milal  wafl-Nihal  (book  on  religions  and  re- 
ligious sects). 

Kitab  Imad  H  MawaYith  al-Ibad  (the  laws  regard- 
ing inheritance  of  the  worshippers). 

al-Takmilah  ft  I  hisab  (on  mathematics). 

To  these  may  be  added  : 

Kitab  al  harb  'ala  ibn-Harb  (against  the  Mu'tazilite 

Ja'far  ibn-Harb). 
The  Ruyat  Allah,  a  dogmatic  argument  over  Surah 

75,  v.  23. 

In  his  work  entitled  Milal  wafl-Nihal,  now  in  the  Con- 
stantinople library,  'Asir  EfYendi  no.  555,  he  treats  in  much 
more  detail  of  some  of  the  sects  on  which  he  therefore 
merely  touches  in  his  Fark. 

The  manuscript  of  this  work,  number  2800  of  the  Berlin 
library,  is  described  in  Ahlwardt's  Verzeichniss  der  ara- 
bischen  Handschriften,  vol.  ii,  p.  681.  He  reports  the 
manuscript  as  untidy,  with  loose  quires  and  leaves,  and  a 
little  worm-eaten.  Some  of  the  pages  in  the  main  part  of 
the  book  are  missing,  as  well  as  the  end  of  the  fifth  chapter 
of  the  fifth  part. 

'Abd  al-Kahir  al-Baghdadfs  work,  Al-Fark  bain  al-Firak, 
is  based  on  the  tradition  we  have  already  mentioned: 
"  There  shall  be  73  sects  in  Islam,  of  which  one  only  shall 
be  saved."  Being  thoroughly  orthodox,  he  begins  by  stress- 
ing this  last  point,  that  one  sect  alone  shall  be  saved.  This 
sect,  the  orthodox  Sunnites,  he  treats  at  the  very  end  of 
his  book. 

9 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 
He  divides  his  work  into  five  parts : 

Part  one  deals  with  the  tradition  already  mentioned. 

Part  two,  in  two  chapters,  gives  a  brief  treatment  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  community  came  to  be  divided  into 
72  sects,  and  a  very  brief  statement  of  the  views  of  the  most 
important  sects. 

Part  three  takes  up  in  eight  chapters  the  opinions  of  the 
unorthodox  sects,  and  gives  an  explanation  of  the  heresy 
of  each. 

Part  four  deals  in  seventeen  short  chapters  with  the  sects 
originating  in  Islam,  but  not  now  found  in  it. 

Part  five  takes  up  in  five  chapters  the  one  orthodox  sect. 

The  beginning  of  his  book,  which  gives  a  clear  summary 
of  the  various  sects,  short  historical  sketches,  and  a  certain 
amount  of  traditional  instances,  is  quite  acceptable  reading. 
When,  however,  he  comes  to  treat  of  the  philosophical  quib- 
blings  of  many  of  the  sects,  he  becomes  rather  hopelessly 
involved.  We  cannot,  however,  give  Baghdad!  all  the 
blame,  for  doubtless  the  apparent  senselessness  of  these 
quibblings  arose  with  the  men  whose  views  he  is  vainly 
trying  to  give  us.  Whatever  the  cause,  there  are  undoubt- 
edly times  when  we  are  tempted  to  quote  the  Arab  poet, 
who,  when  asked  to  explain  the  meaning  of  some  of  his 
poetry,  answered :  "  When  those  verses  were  written,  two 
persons  understood  them,  Allah  and  I;  now  only  one  per- 
son understands  them,  Allah." 

In  conclusion,  it  may  be  rather  interesting  to  compare 
the  different  attitudes  and  methods  of  the  three  men  who 
have  given  us  the  fullest  accounts  of  the  73  Mohammedan 
sects.  We  do  not  include  Shuhfur  ibn-Tahir,  because  his 
work  so  closely  resembles  that  of  Baghdad!  that  it  is  thought 
by  some  to  be  a  resume  of  the  latter's. 

10 


INTRODUCTION 

'All  ibn-Ahmad  ibn-Sa'id  ibn-Hazm  ibn-Ghalib  ibn-Salih 
Abu-Muhhammad  was  born  in  Cordova  in  384/994.  Hav- 
ing been  forced  out  of  political  life  by  a  change  in  govern- 
ment, he  was  compelled  to  turn  from  political  matters  to 
scholarly  ones.  And  as  one  of  the  results  we  have  his  great 
work,  Kitab  al-Milal  wa'l-Nihal,  a  part  of  which  Fried- 
lander  has  translated  in  his  article  in  the  Journal  of  the 
American  Oriental  Society,  vols.  28,  29.  Although  an 
orthodox  Moslem  himself,  he  was  exceedingly  fair  and 
started  out  by  stating  that  he  would  never  charge  an  oppo- 
nent with  heresy  unless  he  could  justify  his  charge  by  a 
verbal  quotation  from  the  opponent's  own  writing,  "be  he 
an  unbeliever,  a  heretic,  or  a  mere  sinner,  since  lying  is  not 
permissible  against  any."  Unfettered  by  the  tradition  of 
the  73  sects,  he  is  able  to  make  logical  division  of  the  sects. 
Friedlander  says :  "  We  may  safely  assume  that  each  name 
recorded  in  the  Milal  wal-Nihal  represents  an  historical 
fact,  and  not  as  in  the  case  of  all  other  writers,  a  mere 
product  of  the  imagination."  What  this  author  is  especially 
remarkable  for  is  his  "  breadth  of  outlook,  power  of  ob- 
servation, and  fairness  of  judgment." 

Shahrastani  was  born  in  467  or  479,  and  died  in  548/ 
1 153.  His  work  entitled  Kitab  al-Milal  wa'l-Nihal  "  has 
systematic  roundness  and  scientific  classification,"  but,  al- 
though he  attempts  to  be  fair,  and  succeeds  far  better  than 
Baghdad!,  there  are  times  when  the  views  of  the  heretics 
are  too  much  for  even  him,  and  he  is  forced  to  give  vent  to 
his  feelings. 

We  thus  have  the  three  points  of  view :  our  author  Bagh- 
dad!, who  starts  out  by  saying  that  all  but  the  one  sect,  the 
orthodox,  are  condemned  to  hell  fire,  and  goes  on  to  enu- 
merate all  those  condemned  sects,  discussing  and  opposing 
their  views,  and  periodically  breaking  forth  in  an  excla- 
mation of  gratitude  that  "  we  are  not  as  they  " ;  Shahras- 

11 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

tan!,  more  scholarly,  his  work  more  carefully  arranged, 
fairer,  trying  to  he  neutral,  but  at  times  failing;  and  Ibn- 
Hazm,  absolutely  neutral  and  bound  by  no  hampering  tra- 
ditions. 

Since  Shahrastam  and  Baghdad!  represent  the  more  sim- 
ilar treatment,  let  us  consider  the  two*  for  a  moment.  The 
first  important  thing  to  note  is  that  Shahrastam  devotes 
two-thirds  of  his  book  to  sects  outside  of  Islam.  In  the 
first  volume  one  part  deals  with  the  73  sects  of  Islam,  and 
the  second  part  with  some  of  the  religions  outside  of  Islam. 
The  religions  treated  in  the  second  part  are  those  which 
possess  a  Book,  and  those  which  have  something  resem- 
bling a  revealed  book.  Under  the  former  he  takes  up  the 
Jews  and  Christians,  and  under  the  latter  the  Magians  and 
the  Thanawiyah,  those  who  accept  two  principles.  In  the 
second  volume  he  treats  of  the  various  philosophies,  the 
Greek,  the  peripatetic,  the  Hindu.  Some  space  is  given 
to  Buddhism,  and  many  discussions  are  recounted  between 
Moslem  and  other  teachers  and  leaders.  Baghdad!,  on 
the  other  hand,  merely  mentions  these  other  religions  in 
passing,  devoting  practically  the  whole  of  this  work  to 
the  sects  within  the  Ummat  al-Islam.  It  is  likely  that  he 
treated  these  other  religions  in  detail  in  his  Milal  wa'l- 
Nihal,  and  naturally  avoided  repetition  here.  As  we  have 
already  seen,  in  the  matter  of  treatment,  Shahrastam 
merely  gives  the  account  of  the  various  sects,  and  only  once 
in  a  while  expresses  his  own  opinion.  Baghdad!,  on  the 
contrary,  cannot  refrain  from  challenging  and  criticizing 
these  heretical  views,  so  that  at  times  his  history  of  the 
sects  becomes  a  polemical  discussion.  He  opens  the  book 
with  a  statement  of  what  he  considers  constitutes  an  ortho- 
dox Moslem,  and  although  those  outside  of  this  pale  may 
have  some  of  the  privileges  of  the  faithful,  such  as  being 
buried  in  a  Moslem  graveyard,  praying  in  the  mosque,  shar- 

12 


INTRODUCTION 

ing  in  the  booties  of  Jihad ;  nevertheless,  they  may  not  have 
prayers  said  over  their  bodies,  animals  slaughtered  by  them 
are  unclean,  and  they  may  not  marry  an  orthodox  Moslem. 
Having  thus  shown  us  clearly  where  he  himself  stands,  he 
does  not  hesitate  to  condemn  the  heretics — some  with  rather 
amusing  humor,  some  with  rather  biting  sarcasm,  and 
others  by  quick  dismissal  as  not  even  worth  discussing.  In 
fact,  the  note  which  runs  through  the  whole  part  dealing 
with  the  orthodox  is:  "  Thank  God  we  are  not  as  they." 

Unfortunately,  Muhammad  Badr  of  Cairo,  who  edited 
this  work,  has  let  pass  many  errors,  many  of  which  Gold- 
ziher  has  corrected  in  an  article  in  the  Z.  D.  M.  G.,  191 1, 
vol.  65.  Others  we  have  corrected.  Many  of  the  Koran 
references  are  wrongly  numbered,  and  some  of  the  proper 
names  and  sects  are  incorrect.  We  should,  however,  be 
grateful  to  him  for  making  this  work  available  to  us,  even 
in  such  an  incomplete  form.  As  will  be  seen,  there  are 
several  places  where  the  editor  himself  states  that  the  manu- 
script was  not  clear,  and  in  one  or  two  cases  there  are  whole 
pages  missing.  A  rather  amusing  error  is  the  one  in  the 
table  of  contents  on  page  21,  where  it  is  stated  that  the 
section  will  be  divided  into  eight  chapters.  Six  only  are 
then  enumerated,  but  in  the  section  eight  headings  are 
given.  Unfortunately,  the  manuscript  being  unavailable  at 
this  moment,  we  cannot  say  whether  this  was  a  slip  of  the 
author  or  of  the  editor.     It  is  more  likely  to  be  the  latter. 

As  to  the  poem  on  page  40,  it  is  a  long,  uninteresting 
one  which  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  subject  in  hand  ex- 
cept at  the  beginning  and  the  end ;  in  the  translation,  there- 
fore, we  have  given  only  the  first  and  last  verses. 

13 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Table  of  Sects 

I.  Rafidiyah  (20) 

A.  Zaidiyah  (3) 

1.  Jarudiyah 

2.  Sulaimamyah  or  Jarlriyah 

3.  Butriyah 

B.  Kaisanlyah  (2) 

1.  Followers  of  ibn-al-Hanafiyah 

2.  Muhammadlyah 

C.  Imamiyah  (15) 

1.  Kamiliyah 

2.  Bakiriyah 

3.  The  Ghulat 

4.  Mubarrakiyah 

5.  Kat'iyah  or  Twelvers 

6.  Hishamiyah 

7.  Zarariyah 

8.  Yunusiyah 

9.  Shaitaniyah 

10.  Muhammadlyah  * 

1 1 .  Nawawiyah  * 

12.  Shumaitiyah  * 

13.  Mu'ammariyah  * 

14.  Isma/iliyah 

15.  Musawiyah 

Starred  sects  are  mentioned  in  the  list  by  BaghdadT  but 
apparently  not  considered  important  enough  to  treat. 

II.  Al-Khawarij  (20) 

1.  The  first  Muhakkamah 

2.  Azarikah 

3.  Najadah 

4.  Sifnyah 

14 


INTRODUCTION 

5.  'Ajaridah  *    (mentions    ten    in    heading, 
treats  eight) 

a.  Khazimiyah 

Ma'lumiyah 
Majhuliyah 

b.  Shu'aibiyah 

c.  The  People  of  Obedience 

d.  Saltiyah 

e.  Akhnasiyah 

f.  Shaibaniyah 

g.  Ma'badiyah 

6.  Rashidiyah 

7.  Mukarramiyah 

a.  Hamziyah  * 

b.  Shamrakiyah  * 

c.  Ibrahimlyah  * 

d.  Wakifiyah* 

e.  Ibacliyah 

Hafsiyah 
Harithiyah 

Khalaf lyah  and  Tha'allbah  are  not  given  in  the  list  but 
are  treated  in  the  chapter. 

The  starred  sects  are  not  treated  in  the  chapter. 

III.  Mn'tazilites  or  Kadariyah  (20) 

1.  Wasiliyah 

2.  'Amriyah 

3.  Hudhailiyah 

4.  Nazzamlyah 

5.  Aswariyah 

6.  Mu'ammariyah 

7.  Iskafiyah 

8.  Ja'fariyah 

9.  Bishriyah 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 


IO. 

Murdariyah 

II. 

Hishamiyah 

12. 

ThamamTyah 

13- 

Jahiziyah 

14- 

Hayitiyah 

15- 

Himariyah 

1 6. 

Khaiyatlyah 

17- 

Followers  of  Salih  Kubbah  * 

18. 

Musaislyah  * 

19. 

Shahhamiyah 

20. 

Ka'biyah 

21. 

Jubba'iyah 

22. 

Bahshamiyah 

Starred  sects  not  treated  in  chapter,  although  mentioned 
in  list.  14  and  15,  although  in  list,  are  treated  under  the 
Ghulat,  that  is,  those  sects  which  started  in  Islam  but  are 
too  heretical  to  be  included  in  the  73. 

IV.  Murji'ah  (5) 

1.  Yunusiyah 

2.  Ghassaniyah 

3.  Thaubaniyah 

4.  Tumanlyah 

5.  Marisiyah 
V.   Najjariyah  (2) 

1.  Barghuthiyah 

2.  Za'faraniyah 

Mustadrikah 
VI.  Jahmiyah 
Bakriyah 
Darariyah 
VII.  Karramiyah  (3) 

1.  Hakakiyah 

2.  Tara'ikiyah 

16 


INTRODUCTION 


3.  Ishakiyah 
Total  seventy-three. 

LIST  OF  SECTS  OUTSIDE  OF  THE  PALE  OF  ISLAM 


Sababiyah 

Ghulat 

Mughiriyah 
Bayamyah 

Harbiyah 

Mansuriyah 

Janahiyah 

Ghurabiyah 

Mufauwadah 

Dhimmiyah 

Sharriyah 

Numainyah 


Haluliyah 

Ashab  al-Ibahah 

xAshab  al-Tanasukh 

Hayitiyah  (of  the  Kadariyah) 

Himariyah 

Yazidiyah  (of  the  Khawarij) 

Maimuniyah 

Batiniyah 


(of  the  Rafidiyah) 

Kate  Chambers  Seelye. 


17 


AL-FARK  BAIN  AL-FIRAK 

In  the  name  of  Allah,  the  Compassionate,  the  Merciful! 
Praise  be  to  Allah,  the  maker  and  originator  of  all  Creation, 
the  manifestator  and  sustainer  of  truth!  Ke  it  is  who 
maketh  of  truth  an  armor  for  him  who  believeth  in  it,  and 
a  source  of  life  to  him  who  relieth  upon  it.  He  maketh 
wrong  a  stumbling-block  to  the  one  who  seeketh  after  it, 
and  a  cause  of  humiliation  to  him  who  pursueth  it.  Prayer 
and  Praise  be  to  the  Purest  of  the  Pure,  and  the  Model 
Guide,  Muhammad,  as  well  as  to  his  kin,  the  choicest  among 
mortals,  the  lighthouse  of  guidance. 

You  have  asked  me  for  an  explanation  of  the  well-known 
tradition  attributed  to  the  Prophet  with  regard  to  the  divi- 
sion of  the  Moslim  Community  into  seventy-three  sects,  of 
which  one  has  saving  grace  and  is  destined  for  Paradise  on 
High,  whilst  the  rest  are  in  the  wrong,  leading  to  the  Deep 
Pit  and  the  Ever-flaming  fire.  You  requested  me  to  draw 
the  distinction  between  the  sect  that  saves,  the  step  of  which 
does  not  stumble  and  from  which  grace  does  not  depart, 
and  the  misguided  sects  which  regard  the  darkness  of  idol- 
atry as  light  and  the  belief  in  truth  as  leading  to  perdition — 
which  sects  are  condemned  to  everlasting  fire  and  shall  find 
no  aid  in  Allah. 

Therefore,  I  feel  it  incumbent  upon  me  to  help  you  along 
the  line  of  your  request  with  regard  to  the  orthodox  faith 
and  the  path  that  is  straight — how  to  distinguish  it  from  the 
perverted  heresies  and  the  distorted  views,  so  that  he  who 
does  perish  shall  know  that  he  is  perishing  and  he  that  is 
saved  that  he  is  so  saved  through  clear  evidence. 

19 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

The  answer  to  your  request  I  have  included  in  this  book, 
the  contents  of  which  I  have  divided  into  five  parts,  to  wit : 

A  chapter  in  explanation  of  the  tradition  transmitted  to 
us  concerning  the  division  of  the  Moslem  community  into 
73  sects. 

A  chapter  dealing  with  the  shame  that  attaches  to  each 
one  of  the  sects  belonging  to  the  erring  heresies. 

A  chapter  on  the  sects  that  are  akin  to  Islam,  but  do  not 
belong  to  it. 

A  chapter  on  the  saving  sect,  the  confirmation  of  its 
sacredness  and  a  statement  concerning  the  beauty  of  its 
faith. 

These  are  the  chapters  of  the  book;  in  each  one  of  which 
we  shall  mention  the  conclusions  that  are  necessary.  So 
may  it  please  Allah. 


PART  I 

An  Explanation  of  the  Well-Known  Traditions 

in  Regard  to  the  Divisions  of  the  (Moslem) 

Community 

The  tradition  has  come  down  to  us  through  the  follow- 
ing chain  of  authorities :  abu-Sahl  Bishr  ibn- Ahmad  ibn- 
Bashshar  al-Isfara'mi,  'Abdallah  ibn-Najiyah,  Wahb  ibn- 
Bakiyyah,  Khalid  ibn-'Abdallah,  Muhammad  ibn-'Amr,  abu- 
Salmah,  abii-Hurairah  that  the  last  said,  the  prophet  of 
Allah — peace  be  unto  him  1— said  :  "  The  Jews  are  divided 
into  71  sects,  and  the  Christians  are  divided  into  72  sects, 
and  my  people  will  be  divided  into  73  sects.''  And 
we  are  told  by  abu-Muhammad  'Abdallah  ibn-' AH  ibn- 
Ziyad  al-Sumaidhi,  who  is  considered  of  interest  and 
authoritative,  that  he  heard  through  the  following  chain  of 
authorities :  Ahmad  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn-'Abd  al-Jabbar,  al- 
Haitham  ibn-Kharijah,  Isma'Il  ibn-' Abbas,  'Abd-al-Rahman 
ibn-Ziyad  ibn-An'am,  'Abdallah  ibn-Yazid,  'Abdallah  ibn- 
4Amr,  that  the  prophet  of  Allah  said :  "  Verily  there  will 
happen  to  my  people  what  happened  to  the  Banu  Isra'il. 
The  Banu  Isra'il  are  divided  into  72  religious  bodies,  and 
my  people  will  be  divided  into  73  religious  bodies,  exceed- 
ing them  by  one.  All  of  them  are  destined  to  hell  fire  ex- 
cept one."  They  said :  "  O,  prophet  of  Allah,  which  is  the 
one  religious  body  that  will  escape  the  fire?"     He  said: 

1  The  expression  of  blessing  and  peace  always  follows  the  name  of 
the  Prophet,  as  well  as  that  of  the  leading-  Companions  and  sheikhs, 
and  the  words  '  mighty  and  powerful '  the  name  of  Allah.  After  the 
first  time  we  will  not  repeat  these  devout  expressions. 

11 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

"  That  to  which  I  belong,  and  my  companions."    The  Kadi 
abu-Muhammad  'Abdallah  ibn-'Umar,  the  Malikite,  says: 
"  We  have  it  from  my  father,  who  had  it  from  his  father, 
that  Walid  ibn-Maslamah  said  that  al-Auza'i  said  that  we 
are  told  by  Katadah,  who  had  it  from  Anas,  who  had  it 
from  the  Prophet :  '  Lo,  the  Banii  Isra'il  are  divided  into 
71  sects,  and  lo  my  people  will  be  divided  into  72.  sects,  all 
of  them  destined  to  hell  fire  except  one,  and  these  are  the 
true  believers/  "     'Abd  al-Kahir  says  that  there  are  many 
Isnads  (chains  of  traditions)  for  the  tradition  dealing  with 
the  division  of  the  community.    A  number  of  the  following 
Companions  have   handed   it   down   as  coming   from  the 
Prophet:     Anas     ibn-Malik,     abu-Hurairah,     abu-1-Darda, 
Jabir,  abu-Sa'id  al-Khidri,  Ubai  ibn-Ka'b,   'Abdallah  ibn- 
(Amr  ibn-al-'As,  abu-Imamah,  Wathilah  ibn-al-Aska'  and 
others.    It  is  also  handed  down  that  the  pious  caliphs  men- 
tioned that  the  community  would  be  divided  after  them,  that 
one  sect  only  would  save  itself,  and  that  the  rest  of  them 
would  be  given  to  error  in  this  world,  and  to  destruction  in 
the  next.     Moreover,  it  is  reported  of  the  Prophet  that  he 
condemned  the  Kadarites,  calling  them  the  Magians  of  this 
people.    It  is  also  reported  that  he  condemned  the  Murjiites 
together  with  the  Kadarites.     To  this  is  added  the  report 
that  he  condemned  the  heretics,  i.  e.  the  Kharijites.    While 
it  is  handed  down  from  the  leading  Companions  that  he 
condemned  the  Kadarites  and  the  Murjiites  and  the  heret- 
ical Kharijites.     'All,  Allah  have  mercy  on  him,  mentions 
these  sects  in  his  Khutbah  (sermon)  which  is  known  as  the 
Zahra' ;  in  it  he  declared  himself  not  responsible  for  the 
people  of  Adimawat.1     Every  man  of  intelligence  among 
the  authors  of  the  treatises  ascribed  to  .  .  .  (text  not  clear) 
has  known  that  the  Prophet  in  speaking  of  the  divisions  that 

1  We  have  been  unable  to  find  any  explanation  for  this  word. 

22 


EXPLANATION  OF  TRADITIONS 

were  to  be  condemned  and  the  members  of  which  were  des- 
tined for  hell-fire,  did  not  mean  the  various  legal  schools, 
who,  though  they  disagreed  as  to  the  derivative  Institutes 
of  law,  agreed  concerning  the  fundamentals  of  religion. 
Now  the  Mohammedans  held  two  opinions  as  regards  the 
deductions  drawn  from  the  fundamental  principles  of  right 
and  wrong.  The  first  looks  with  approval  upon  all  those 
who  promoted  the  Science  of  derivative  Institutes,  For  it, 
all  the  legal  schools  are  right.  The  second  approves,  in  con- 
nection with  each  derivative  Institute,  one  of  the  parties 
contending  about  it  and  disapproves  all  the  others — with- 
out, however,  attributing  error  to  the  one  who  goes  astray 
in  the  matter.  And  verily  the  Prophet,  in  mentioning  the 
sects  condemned,  had  in  mind  only  those  holders  of  erring 
opinions  who  differ  from  the  one  sect  which  will  be  saved, 
in  such  matters  as  ethics  and  the  unity  (of  God),  promises 
and  threats  (regarding  future  life),  predestination  and  free- 
will, the  determination  of  good  and  evil,  right  guidance  and 
error,  the  will  and  wish  of  God,  prophetic  vision  and 
understanding,  the  attributes  of  Allah,  his  names  and 
qualities,  any  question  concerning  what  is  ordered  and 
what  is  permitted,  [signs  for]  prophecy  and  its  condi- 
tions, and  similar  questions  in  which  the  Sunnites  and  the 
(Moslem)  community  from  among  the  followers  of  ana- 
logical deduction  and  tradition  agree  upon  the  fundamen- 
tals, and  in  which  they  are  opposed  by  the  holders  of  erring 
opinions,  namely  the  Kadariyah,  the  Khawarij,  the  Rawafid, 
the  Najjariyah,  the  Jahmiyah,  the  Mujassimah,  the  Mus- 
habbihah,  and  those  who  follow  them  *  among  the  erring 
sects.  And,  verily,  those  who  differ  in  regard  to  ethics  and 
the  unity  (of  God),  the  worship  of  graves  and  of  ancestors, 
are  agreed  in  regard  to  such  matters  as  celestial  vision, 

1  Not  clear  in  the  original. 

23 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

divine  attributes,  what  is  ordained  and  what  is  permitted. 
But  in  regard  to  the  conditions  of  true  prophecy  and  the 
Imamship,  some  of  them  accuse  each  other  of  unbelief.  So 
that  the  tradition  handed  down  in  regard  to  the  breaking-up 
of  the  community  into  73  sects  must  be  understood  to  refer 
to  differences  such  as  these — not  to  those  on  which  the  lead- 
ing jurists  differed  in  the  matter  of  Institutes  drawn  from 
the  fundamental  principles  of  right  and  wrong.  Is  it  not 
that  in  those  things  in  which  they  differ  as  regards  Insti- 
tutes, it  is  not  at  all  a  question  of  unbelief  or  of  error?  I 
shall  mention  in  the  following  chapter  the  various  sects  to 
which  the  tradition  refers  concerning  the  subdividing  of  the 
Islamic  world,  so  it  please  Allah. 

24 


PART  i 

This  part  treats  of  the  manner  in  which  this  community 
has  been  divided  into  73.  It  also  contains  an  explanation 
of  the  sects  which  are  collected  under  the  general  name  of 
the  Millat  al-Islam.  There  are  two  chapters  in  this  part : 
one  deals  with  the  explanation  of  the  idea  underlying  the 
different  sects  included  under  the  general  name  of  Millat 
al-Islam;  the  second  concerns  the  explanation  of  how  the 
community  has  become  divided,  and  the  enumeration  of  its 
73  sects.  I  shall  mention  in  each  one  of  these  chapters  what 
is  necessary,  so  it  please  Allah. 

25 


CHAPTER  I 
Explanation  of  the  Idea 

This  chapter  explains  the  idea  underlying  the  expression 
Millat  al-Islam  as  a  general  designation  of  the  various  sects. 
Before  going  into  details  it  is  necessary  to  say  that  those 
who  belong  to  Islam  are  divided  in  opinion  in  regard  to 
those  to  whom  the  general  name  of  Millat  al-Islam  is  given. 
Abu-1-Kasim  al-Ka'bi 1  claims  in  his  treatises,  "  When  one 
uses  the  expression  Ummat  al-Islam,  it  refers  to  everyone 
who  affirms  the  prophetic  character  of  Muhammad,  and  the 
truth  of  all  that  he  preached,  no  matter  what  he  asserted 
after  this  declaration."    Others  claim  that  Ummat  al-Islam 
comprises  all  who  acknowledge  the  necessity  of  turning  in 
the  direction  of  the  Ka'bah  in  prayer.     The  Karramiyah, 
the  Mujassimah  (corporealists)  of  Khurasan,  say  that  the 
expression  Ummat  al-Islam  comprises  all  those  who  enun- 
ciate the  two  parts  of  the  creed.     They  say  everyone  who 
says,  "  There  is  no  God  but  Allah,  and  Muhammad  is  the 
prophet  of  Allah,"  is  verily  a  true  believer,  and  belongs  to 
the  Millat  al-Islam,  no  matter  whether  he  is  sincere  or  in- 
sincere, hiding  unbelief  and  heresy  under  this   assertion. 
Thus  they  claimed  that  those  who  were  insincere  in  the  time 
of  the  prophet  Allah  were  really  believers,  and  that  their 
faith  was  like  the  faith  of  Gabriel  and  Michael  and  the 
prophets  and  the  angels,  in  spite  of  their  joining  treachery 
to  their  profession  of  the  two  parts  of  the  creed.      This 

1  Haarbrucker's  Translation  of  ShahrastanI,  vol.  ii,  p.  400. 

2  Surah  49,  v.  14.    Cf.  Haarbriicker,  ShahrastanI,  vol.  i,  pp.  37-38. 

27 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

opinion,  together  with  the  opinion  of  al-Ka'bi  in  his  expla- 
nations of  the  name  of  Islam,  is  refuted  by  the  saying  of 
the  'Isawiah  among  the  Jews  of  Ispahan.  For  verily  they 
accept  the  prophetic  character  of  our  prophet  Muhammad, 
and  the  truth  of  all  his  teachings.  But  they  claim  that  he 
was  sent  to  the  Arabs,  not  to  the  Banu  Israel.  They  say 
also  that  Muhammad  is  the  prophet  of  Allah.  Nevertheless, 
they  are  not  numbered  among  the  sects  of  Islam.  And  some 
of  the  Sharikaniyah  2  among  the  jews  relate  concerning 
their  leader  known  as  Sharikan  that  he  said :  "  Indeed 
Muhammad  was  a  prophet  of  Allah  to  the  Arabs,  and  to 
the  rest  of  mankind,  with  the  exception  of  the  Jews."  And 
also  that  he  said :  "  The  Koran  is  true  and  the  Adhan  [the 
announcement  of  prayer],  the  Ikamah,  the  performance  of 
io  the  five  prayers,  the  fast  of  Ramadan,  and  the  pilgrimage 
of  the  Ka'bah,  all  these  are  truths,  but  they  are  prescribed 
for  the  Moslems,  not  for  the  Jews."  Often  some  of  the 
Sharikaniyah  have  kept  some  of  these  observances.  They 
have  professed  the  two  parts  of  the  creed :  "  There  is  no 
God  but  Allah,  and  Muhammad  is  the  prophet  of  Allah." 
They  have  also  asserted  that  his  religion  is  true.  Yet,  in 
spite  of  this,  they  are  not  of  the  Ummat  al-Islam,  because 
of  their  profession  that  the  law  of  Islam  has  no  binding 
force  upon  them.  And  as  regards  the  saying  of  one  who 
uses  the  expression  Ummat  ul-Islam  as  a  term  to  be  applied 
to  all  who  see  the  necessity  of  turning  in  prayer  to  the 
Ka'bah  situated  in  Mecca,  it  must  be  remembered  that  some 
of  the  legalists  of  al-Hijaz  have  favored  this  view,  but  the 
theoretical  reasoners  (ashab  cd-ra'i)  rejected  it,  according 
to  what  Abu  Hanifah  reports,  to  the  effect  that  he  who  be- 
lieves in  turning  to  the  Ka'bah  in  prayer,  even  if  he  is  in 
doubt  as  to  its  location,  is  in  the  right.    But  the  traditional- 

1  Poznanski  in  Revue  des  Etudes  Juives,  LX :  311. 

28 


EXPLANATION  OF  THE  IDEA 

ists  (ashab  al-Hadlth)  do  not  hold  the  belief  that  he  is 
orthodox  who  doubts  the  location  of  the  Ka'bah,  just  as 
they  do  not  accept  one  who  doubts  the  necessity  of  turning 
to  the  Ka'bah  in  prayer. 

The  true  view,  according  to  us,  is  that  the  Ummat  al- 
Islam  comprises  those  who  profess  the  view  that  the  world 
is  created,  the  unity  of  its  maker,  his  preexistence,  his  attri- 
butes, his  equity,  his  wisdom,  the  denial  of  his  anthropo- 
morphic character,  the  prophetic  character  of  Muhammad, 
and  his  universal  Apostolate,  the  acknowledgment  of  the  con- 
stant validity  of  his  law,  that  all  that  he  enjoined  was  truth, 
that  the  Koran  is  the  source  of  all  legal  regulations,  and 
that  the  Ka'bah  is  the  direction  in  which  all  prayers  should 
be  turned.     Everyone  who  professes  all  this  and  does  not 
follow  a  heresy  that  might  lead  him  to  unbelief,  he  is  an 
orthodox  Sunnite,  believing  in  the  unity  of  Allah.     If,  to 
the  accepted  beliefs  which  we  have  mentioned  he  adds  a 
hateful  heresy,  his  case  must  be  considered.    And  if  he  in-    n 
cline  to  the  heresy  of  the  Batimyah,  or  the  Bayamyah,  or  the 
Mughirah,  or  the  Khattabiyah.  who  believe  in  the  divine 
character  of  all  the  Imams,  or  of  some  of  them  at  least,  or 
if  he  follows  the  schools  which  believe  in  the  incarnation  of 
God,  or  one  of  the  schools  of  the  people  believing  in  the 
transmigration  of  souls,  or  the  school  of  the  Maimuniyah 
of  the  Khawarij  who  allow  marriage  with  one's  daughter's 
daughter  or  one's  son's  daughter,  or  follow  the  school  of  the 
Yazidiyah  from  among  the  Ibadiyah  with  their  teaching 
that  the  law  of  Islam  will  be  abrogated  at  the  end  of  time, 
or  if  he  permits  as  lawful  what  the  text  of  the  Koran  for- 
bids, or  forbids  that  which  the  text  of  the  Koran  allows  as 
lawful,  and  which  does  not  admit  of  differing  interpretation, 
such  an  one  does  not  belong  to  the  Ummat  al-Islam,  nor 
should  he  be  esteemed.    But  if  his  heresy  is  like  the  heresy 
of  the  Mu'tazilites,  or  the  Khawarij,  or  the  Randah  of  the 

29 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Imamiyah,  or  the  Zaidiyah  heresies,  or  of  the  heresy  of  the 
Najjariyah,  or  the  Jahmiyah,  or  the  Darariyah,  or  the  Mu- 
jassimah,  then  he  would  be  of  the  Ummat  al-Islam  in  some 
respects,  namely :  he  would  be  entitled  to  be  buried  in  the 
graveyard  of  the  Moslems,  and  to  have  a  share  in  the  tribute 
and  booty  which  is  procured  by  the  true  believers  in  war 
with  the  idolators  provided  he  fights  with  the  true  believers. 
Nor  should  he  be  prevented  from  praying  in  the  mosques. 
But  he  is  not  of  the  Ummat  in  other  respects,  namely  that 
no  prayer  should  be  allowed  over  his  dead  body,  nor  behind 
him  (to  the  grave) ;  moreover  any  animal  slaughtered  by 
him  is  not  lawful  food,  nor  may  he  marry  an  orthodox 
Moslem  woman.  It  is  also  not  lawful  for  an  orthodox  man 
to  marry  one  of  their  women  if  she  partake  of  their  belief. 
'AH  ibn  abi-Talib  said  to  the  Khawarij :  "  There  are  three 
things  binding  upon  us,  that  we  should  not  start  fighting 
with  you,  that  we  should  not  forbid  you  the  mosques  of 
Allah  so  that  you  may  mention  the  name  of  Allah  in  them, 
and  that  we  should  not  hinder  you  from  sharing  the  booty 
as  long  as  your  allegiance  is  with  us.     Moreover,  Allah 

knows  best." 

30 


CHAPTER  II 
The  Division  into  Sects 


12 


Contains  an  explanation  of  the  manner  in  which  the 
Ummat  differed,  together  with  an  enumeration  of  the  num- 
ber of  its  73  sects. 

At  the  death  of  the  prophet,  the  Moslems  followed  one 
path  in  the  fundamental  principles  of  religion  and  its  de- 
duced corollaries,  except  in  the  case  of  those  who  agreed  in 
public  but  in  private  were  hypocrites.  The  first  disagree- 
ment came  when  the  people  disagreed  over  the  death  of  the 
prophet.  Some  among  them  asserted  that  he  had  not  died, 
and  that  Allah  had  only  wished  to  raise  him  to  himself  as 
he  had  raised  'Isa  ibn-Maryam  to  himself.  This  difference 
ceased,  and  all  were  agreed  upon  his  death,  when  abu-Bakr 
al-Siddik  brought  to  them  the  words  of  Allah  to  his 
Prophet :  "  Verily  thou  shalt  die,  and  they  shall  die."  He 
said  to  them :  "  Whoever  worshipped  Muhammad,  verily 
Muhammad  is  dead ;  whoever  worshipped  the  Lord  of  Mu- 
hammad, lo  verily  he  is  living  and  dieth  not."  Then  they 
differed  over  the  Prophet's  place  of  burial,  the  people  of 
Mecca  wishing  the  body  to  be  taken  to  Mecca  because  that 
was  his  birthplace,  the  place  of  his  calling,  the  place  to 
which  he  turned  in  prayer,  the  place  of  his  family,  and 
there  is  the  grave  of  his  ancestor  Ishmael;  while  the  people  13 
of  al-Madmah  wished  him  to  be  buried  in  that  city  because 
that  was  the  home  of  his  flight  and  the  home  of  his  Helpers. 
Others  desired  the  body  to  be  taken  to  the  Holy  Land 
and  be  buried  in  Jerusalem  by  the  grave  of  his  ancestor, 
Abraham  the  beloved.  This  difference,  however,  ceased 
when  abu-Bakr  al-Siddik  related  to  them  on  the  authority 

31 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

of  the  Prophet :  "  Verily  the  prophets  are  buried  where 
they  die."  They  therefore  buried  him  in  his  chamber  in 
al-Madinah.  After  this  they  differed  over  the  Imamate. 
The  Helpers  (Ansar)  agreed  to  acknowledge  Sa'd  ibn- 
'Ubadah  al-Khazraji.  But  the  Kuraish  said :  "  The  Ima- 
mate must  not  be,  save  among  the  Kuraish."  Then  the 
Ansars  agreed  with  the  Kuraish  because  of  the  saying  of 
the  Prophet  relating  to  them :  "  The  Imams  are  of  the 
Kuraish."  But  this  point  of  difference  has  lasted  till  this 
day,  for  the  Darar  or  the  Khawarij  held  that  the  Imam 
could  come  from  others  than  the  Kuraish.  The  next  differ- 
ence arose  over  the  affair  of  Fadak,1  and  over  the  inheri- 
tance of  property  left  by  prophets.  The  decision  of  Abu- 
Bakr  settled  this  matter  by  the  tradition  coming  from  the 
prophet,  "  Verily  the  prophets  do  not  bequeath  anything." 
They  then  differed  over  the  view  as  to  what  cancels  the  ob- 
ligation of  alms.  But  they  finally  agreed  to  the  judgment 
of  Abu-Bakr  concerning  the  duty  of  their  warfare.  After 
this  they  busied  themselves  making  war  upon  T ulaihah  2 
when  he  declared  himself  a  prophet  and  rebelled,  until  he 
was  driven  to  Syria.  In  the  days  of  'Umar  he  returned  to 
Islam  and  was  present  with  Sa'd  ibn  Abi-Wakkas  at  the 
battle  of  al-Kadisiyah,  and  after  that  at  the  battle  of  Naha- 
wand,  where  he  was  killed  as  a  martyr.  After  this  they 
made  war  on  Musailamah,  the  false  prophet,  until  Allah 
14  put  an  end  to  his  affair  and  to  the  affair  of  Sajah  the  false 
prophetess,  and  also  to  the  affair  of  al-Aswad  ibn-Zaid  al- 
'Anasi.  This  over,  they  turned  to  the  killing  of  the  rest  of 
the  apostates,  until  Allah  ended  that  affair.  After  this  they 
made  war  on  the  Greeks  and  Persians.  And  Allah  granted 
them  victory.     During  all  this  time  they  were  agreed  upon 

1  Jewish  village  conquered  by  Muhammad. 

-  Ibrt-Hajar,  Biographical  Dictionary  of  Persons  who  knew  Mohammed, 
vol.  ii,  p.  596. 

32 


THE  DIVISION  INTO  SECTS 

such  questions  as  ethics,  the  unity  of  God,  promises  and 
threats,  and  other  fundamental  principles  of  religion.    They 
differed  only  over  the  application  of  the  Fikh   [religious 
canon],  in  the  cases  such  as  inheritance  of  the  grandfather 
with  brothers,  and  sisters  with  fathers  and  mothers  or  with 
the  father  alone;  over  questions  concerning  justice,  consan- 
guinity and  partnership  returns,  and  whether  sisters  can  be 
residuary  legatees  of  the   father  and  the  mother,  or  the 
father  with  his  daughter,  or  the  daughter  of  a  son.     They 
also  differed  as  to  the  line  of  relationship  and  the  question 
of  what  is   forbidden,  and  such  similar  questions,  differ- 
ences which  do  not  lead  to  doctrinal  error  or  immoral  acts. 
They  were  in  this  concord  in  the  days  of  Abu  Bakr  and 
'Umar  and  during  six  years  of  the  caliphate  of  'Uthman. 
After  this  they  differed  over  'Uthman  for  certain  things 
which  he  did,  for  which  some  blamed  him,  this  blame  cul- 
minating in  his  punishment  by  death.    And  after  his  murder 
they  differed  over  his  assassins  and  those  who  abandoned 
him,  a  divergence  of  opinion  that  has  lasted  until  this  day. 
Their  next  point  of  difference  was  over  the  affair  of  'All  and 
the  Followers  of  the  Camel,  over  the  affair  of  Mu'awiyah 
and  the  people  of   Siffin,  over  the  judgment  of  the  two 
judges,  abu-Musa  al-'Ash'ari,  and  'Amr  ibn-al-'Asi;  these 
differences  also  have  endured  down  to  our  time.     In  the 
time  of  the  later  Companions  there  arose  the  divergent 
views  of  the  Kadariyah  as  to  predestination  and  free  will, 
from  the  views  of  Ma'bad  al-Juhani  and  of  Ghailan  al-    15 
Dimashki  and  of  Ja'd  ibn-Dirham.    Among  the  later  Com- 
panions who  differed  from  them  was  'Abdallah  ibn-'Umar, 
Jabir  ibn-'Abdallah  and  abu-Hurairah,  and  ibn-' Abbas,  and 
Anas   ibn-Malik   and   'Abdallah   ibn-abi-Aufi   and   'Ukbah 
ibn-' Amir  al-Juhani  and  their  contemporaries.     These  en- 
joined their  successors  not  to  greet  the  Kadariyah,  nor  to 
pray  over  their  bodies,  and  not  to  visit  their  sick.     After 

33 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

this  the  Khawarij  differed  over  some  things  among  them- 
selves, and  they  separated  into  as  many  as  twenty  divisions, 
each  of  them  condemning  the  rest  as  unbelievers.  Then  it 
came  to  pass  in  the  days  of  al-Hasan  al-Basri  that  Wasil x 
ibn-'Ata  al-Ghazzal  seceded  over  the  matter  of  predestina- 
tion, and  also  in  regard  to  a  middle  position  between  two 
extremes,  and  'Arnr  ibn-'Ubaid  ibn-Bab  went  over  to  him 
with  his  heresy.  Al-Hasan  drove  them  both  from  his  im- 
mediate community,  and  they  separated  from  the  rest,  tak- 
ing their  place  beyond  the  columns  of  the  mosque  of  al- 
Basrah.  They  and  their  followers  were  called  Mu'tazilah 
because  of  their  turning  from  the  words  of  the  Ummah  in 
their  assertions  that  a  transgressor  can  be  of  the  Ummat  al- 
Islam  and  yet  neither  a  believer  nor  an  unbeliever. 

Now  as  to  the  Rawand  (or  Shia)  :  The  Sabbabiyah  2 
among  them  started  their  heresy  in  the  time  of  'All.  One 
of  them  said  to  'AH,  "  Thou  art  a  God,"  and  'AH  destroyed 
some  of  them  by  fire,  and  banished  ibn-Saba  to  Sabat  al- 
Madain.  This  sect  is  not  one  of  the  divisions  of  the  Ummat 
al-Islam,  because  it  calls  'All  a  god.  Then  the  Rawafid, 
after  the  time  of  'AH  separated  into  four  classes,  the  Zaid- 
J6  lyah,  the  Imamiyah,  the  Kaisaniyah  and  the  Ghulat.  These 
in  turn  further  subdivided,  each  sect  condemning  the  rest. 
All  of  the  subdivisions  of  the  Ghulat  are  outside  of  the  pale 
of  Islam.  But  the  subdivisions  of  the  Zaidlyah  and  of  the 
ImamTyah  are  still  considered  among  the  sects  of  the  Um- 
mah. The  Najjariyah  in  the  neighborhood  of  al-Rai  sep- 
arated after  the  time  of  al-Za'farani  into  sects  which  con- 

1  Shahrastani  incorrectly  has  Wafzil. 

2  Saba  lyah — became  Sabbabiyah  (denouncers)  because  of  their  attitude 
toward  'All.  Ibn-Saba  was  said  to  be  a  Jew,  "outwardly  confessing 
Islam  in  order  to  beguile  its  adherents."  Ibn-I-Iazm,  Kitdb  al-Milal 
wa'l-Nihal,  tr.  in  part  by  I.  Friedlander,  J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxviii,  p.  37- 
Treated  more  fully  by  Shahrastani,  Haarbriicker,  vol.  i,  p.  200. 

34 


THE  DIVISION  INTO  SECTS 

demned  each  other.  The  secession  of  the  Bakiriyah  was 
due  to  Bakr,  the  nephew  of  'Abd  al- Wahid  ibn-Ziyad;  the 
secession  of  the  Darariyah  to  Darar  ibn-'Amr;  and  that  of 
the  Jahmiyah  to  Jahm  ibn-Safwan.  Jahm  and  Bakr  and 
Darar  declared  their  views  when  Wasil  ibn-'Ata  brought 
forth  his  errors,  and  the  propaganda  of  the  Batiniyah  ap- 
peared in  the  days  of  the  (Caliph)  al-Ma'mun  at  the  hands 
of  Hamdan  Karmat  and  'Abdallah  ibn-Maimun  al-Kadah. 
The  Batiniyah,  however,  do  not  belong  to  the  sects  of  Islam, 
but  rather  to  the  sects  of  the  Magians,  as  we  shall  show 
later.  They  appeared  in  the  days  of  Muhammad  ibn-Tahir 
ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-Tahir  in  Khurasan,  in  contrast  to  the 
Karramiyah,  the  corporealists. 

The  Zaidiyah  from  among  the  Rawafid  were  divided  into 
three  sects,  the  Jarudiyah  and  the  Sulaimaniyah,  and  some 
add  the  Hurairiyah  and  the  Butriyah;  these  three  sects 
being  held  together  by  their  doctrine  of  the  Imamship  of 
Zaid  ibn-'AH  ibn-al-Husain  ibn-'AK  ibn-abi-Talib  when  he 
revolted.  This  was  at  the  time  of  Hisham  ibn-'Abd  al- 
Malik.  One  part  of  them,  the  Kaisamyah,  represent  nu- 
merous divisions,  but  they  all  can  be  included  in  two  sects, 
one  of  which  claimed  that  Muhammad  ibn-al-Hanafiyah 
was  still  alive,  that  he  had  not  died,  that  they  awaited  his  17 
coming,  claiming  that  he  was  the  expected  Mahdi.  While 
the  second  of  these  sects  agreed  with  them  as  to  his  Imamate 
while  he  was  alive,  and  at  the  time  of  his  death,  after  his 
death  they  transferred  the  Imamate  to  someone  else.  After 
this,  further,  they  differed  over  the  one  to  whom  the  Imam- 
ate is  transferred. 

The  Imamiyah  who  [at  first]  had  separated  into  the  Zaid- 
iyah, the  Kaisamyah  J  and  the  Ghulat,  later  formed  fifteen 
sects,  viz.,  al-Muhammadiyah,  al-Bakinyah,  al-Nawisiyah, 

1  Text :  "  Kisa  lyah  " ;  but  see  ShahrastanI,  p.  165. 

35 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

al-Shumaitiyah,  al-'Ammariyah,  al-Isma/iliyah,  al-Mubarak- 
lyah,  al-Musawiyah,  al-Kita'iyah,  the  Ithna  'Asahriyah  (the 
Twelvers),  al-Hishamlyah,  the  followers  of  Hisham  ibn-al- 
Hakam,  or  of  Hisham  ibn-Salim  al-Jawaliki,  al-Zarariyah, 
followers  of  Zararah  ibn-A'yun,  al-Yunusiyah  followers  of 
Yunus  al-Kummi,  al-Shaitaniyah  followers  of  Shaitan  al- 
Tak,  al-Kamiliyah  followers  of  abu-Kamil,  who  was  the 
most  severe  in  condemning  'AH  and  the  rest  of  the  Com- 
panions. These  are  the  twenty  sects  springing  from  the 
Rawafid;  of  these,  three  are  Zaidiyah  and  two  Kaisamyah, 
with  fifteen  sects  of  the  Imamiyah. 

The  Ghulat  among  them,  however,  who  hold  to  the  divine 
character  of  the  Imams  and  sanction  those  things  forbidden 
of  the  Canon  law  and  reject  its  obligatory  character,  as  for 
example  the  Bayaniyah,  the  Mughiriyah,  the  Janahiyah,  the 
Mansuriyah,  the  Khattabiyah,  the  Haluliyah,  and  those  who 
hold  similar  views,  are  not  of  the  sects  of  Islam  although 
they  claim  adherence  to  it.  These  we  shall  mention  in  a 
separate  part  following  this  one. 

Now  when  differences  arose  among  the  Khawarij  they 
split  up  into  the  twenty  following  sects :  The  first  Muhak- 
18  kimah,  the  Azarikah,  the  Najadat,  the  Sifriyah,  the  'Aja- 
ridah,  the  latter  splitting  up  into  numerous  sects,  namely: 
the  Khazimiyah,  the  Shu'aibiyah,  the  Ma'lumiyah,  the  Maj- 
huliyah,  the  Ma'badlyah,  the  Rashidiyah,  the  Mukarram- 
lyah,  the  Hamziyah,  the  Ibrahimlyah,  the  Wakifah,  and  the 
Abacliyah  who  in  turn  split  into  the  Hafsiyah,  the  Harith- 
lyah,  the  Yazldiyah,  and  the  Followers  of  Obedience  which 
is  not  intended  for  Allah;  of  these  the  Yazldiyah  are  the 
followers  of  ibn-Yazid  ibn-Unais,  and  are  not  of  the  sects 
of  Islam  because  they  say  that  the  law  of  Islam  will  be- 
come annulled  at  the  end  of  time  by  a  prophet  sent  from 
Persia.  The  same  is  the  case  of  the  'Ajaridah,  of  whom 
there  is  a  sect  called  the  Maimuniyah,  which  was  not  of  the 

36 


THE  DIVISION  INTO  SECTS 

sects  of  Islam  because  it  sanctioned  the  marriage  with 
daughters  of  daughters  and  with  daughters  of  sons  just  as 
the  Magians  sanction  it.  We  will  mention  the  Yazidiyah 
and  the  Maimumyah  among  those  who  are  derived  from 
Islam,  but  are  not  of  it,  nor  of  its  sects. 

The  Kadariyah,  the  departers  from  truth,  split  up  into 
twenty  sects,  each  one  condemning  the  rest.  These  are 
their  names :  the  Wasiliyah,  the  'Amriyah,  the  Hudhailiyah, 
the  Nizamiyah,  the  Amwariyah,  the  'Umariyah,  the  Thu- 
mamiyah,  the  Jahiziyah,  the  Hayitiyah,  the  Himariyah,  the 
Khaiyatiyah,1  the  Sahamiyah,  the  followers  of  Salih  Kub- 
bah,  the  Muwaisiyah,  the  Ka'biyah,  the  Jubba'ryah,  the 
Bahshamiyah,  who  were  founded  by  abu-Hashim  ibn-al- 
Jubba'i.  These  are  the  twenty-two  sects;  two  of  them  do 
not  belong  to  the  sects  of  Islam,  i.  e.  the  Hayitiyah  and  the 
Himariyah.  We  shall  mention  them  among  the  sects  which 
are  derived  from  Islam  but  do  not  belong  to  it. 

Three  classes  are  to  be  distinguished  among  the  Mur-  19 
ji'ah :  one  of  these  classes  believes  in  disobedience  in  mat- 
ters of  faith  and  in  predestination,  according  to  the  belief 
of  the  Kadariyah.  They  are  therefore  counted  among  the 
Kadariyah  and  the  Mur  ji'ah  like  abu-Shimr  al-Murjf, 
Muhammad  ibn-Shabib  al-Basri  and  al-Khalidi.  The  sec- 
ond of  these  classes  believes  in  disobedience  in  matters  of 
faith,  but  are  inclined  toward  the  view  of  Jahm  as  to  deeds 
and  works.  These  are  all  Jahmiyah  and  Murji'ah.  The 
third  class  accepted  the  view  in  regard  to  disobedience,  but 
did  not  accept  the  doctrine  of  predestination.  It  formed 
five  sects :  the  Yunusiyah,  the  Ghassaniyah,  the  Thauban- 
lyah,  the  Taumamyah,  and  the  Marisiyah.  The  Najjar- 
lyah  comprise  to-day  in  the  city  of  al-Rai  more  than  ten 
sects,  although  they  are  originally  no  more  than  three  sects : 

1  Haarbrucker's  Shahrastanl,  vol.  i,  p.  79. 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

the  Burghunlyah,  the  Za'faranlyah,  and  the  Mustadrikah. 
The  Bakrlyah  and  the  Dirariyah  each  form  one  sect;  They 
do  not  have  numerous  followings.  The  Jahmiyah  also 
form  one  sect.  The  Karamiyah  in  Khurasan  form  three 
sects,  the  Hakakiyah,  the  Taraikiyah,  and  the  Ishakiyah. 
These  three  sects,  however,  do  not  condemn  each  other. 
We  therefore  regard  them  all  as  a  single  sect.  All  these 
that  we  have  mentioned  make  up  the  seventy-two  sects ;  of 
them  twenty  are  Rawafid,  twenty  Khawarij,  twenty  Ka- 
dariyah  and  ten  Murji'ah;  three  of  them  are  Najjariyah, 
including  the  Bakrlyah  and  the  Dirariyah,  the  Jahmiyah 
and  the  Karramiyah;  and  these  are  the  72  sects.  The  73d 
sect,  the  orthodox,  is  composed  of  the  two  classes  of  the 
theorists  and  the  traditionalists,  except  those  who  deal 
lightly  with  tradition.  The  legalists  of  these  two  groups 
and  the  Koran  readers,  traditionalists,  and  the  philosophers 
among  the  followers  of  tradition,  all  are  united  in  the  one 
opinion  as  to  the  unity  of  the  creator  and  his  attributes,  his 
justice  and  his  wisdom,  his  names  and  his  qualities;  also  in 
regard  to  prophecy  and  Imamate,  and  the  doctrines  of  retri- 
bution, and  the  rest  of  the  fundamentals  of  religion.  They 
differ  only  over  that  which  is  permitted  and  that  which  is 
forbidden  in  the  deductions  from  the  fundamental  doctrines. 
In  the  things  in  which  they  differ  there  is  nothing  that  can 
cause  them  to  err,  or  lead  them  astray.  They  form  the 
[great]  body  of  those  who  will  be  saved.  They  are  united 
by  the  firm  belief  in  the  unity  of  the  creator  and  in  his 
eternity,  the  eternity  of  his  unending  attributes,  the  possi- 
bility of  having  visions  of  Him,  without  falling  into  the 
error  of  anthropomorphism  or  atheism,  and  in  acknowledg- 
ing the  books  of  Allah  and  his  prophets,  the  authority  of  the 
law  of  Islam,  the  permitting  of  that  which  the  Koran  per- 
mits and  the  forbidding  of  that  which  the  Koran  forbids, 
as  well  as  the  holding  of  those  traditions  of  the  prophets  of 

38 


THE  DIVISION  INTO  SECTS 

Allah  which  are  trustworthy,  the  belief  in  the  last  day  and 
the  resurrection,  the  questioning  of  the  two  angels  in  the 
grave,  and  the  belief  in  the  pool  (al-haud)  and  the  balance.1 
He  who  holds  the  above-mentioned  doctrines,  not  mixing 
with  his  beliefs  any  of  the  heresies  of  the  Khawarij,  and 
the  Raiidiyah  and  the  Kadariyah  and  the  rest  of  the  un- 
orthodox ;  such  a  one  belongs  to  those  who  are  to  be  saved ; 
may  Allah  preserve  him  in  his  belief.  The  majority  of  the 
Mohammedans  are  of  this  character,  the  greater  number  of 
whom  are  of  the  followers  of  Malik  and  Shaii'i,  and  abu- 
Hanlfah  and  al-Auza'i  and  al-Thauri  and  the  Ahl  al-Zahir. 
This  then  explains  what  we  desired  to  explain  in  this  part. 
In  the  part  which  follows  we  shall  mention  the  divisions  of 
the  opinion  of  each  sect  of  the  heretical  sects  which  we  have 
mentioned,  so  it  please  Allah. 

1  Surah  108,  1-3;  Surah  42,  6;  21,  47.  : 

39 


PART  III 

An  explanation  of  the  various  opinions  of  the  heretical 
sects  and  a  detailed  explanation  of  the  heresies  of  each  sect. 
This  chapter  contains  eight  sections,  of  which  the  following 
are  the  titles : 

I.  An  explanation  of  the  opinions  of  the  sects  of  the 

Randan. 
II.  An  explanation  of  the  opinions  of  the  sects  of  the 
Khawarij. 

III.  An  explanation  of  the  opinions  of  the  sects  of  the 
Mu'tazilah  and  the  Kadariyah. 

IV.  An  explanation  of  the  opinions  of  the  sects  of  the 
Dirariyah,  Bakriyah  and  Jahmlyah. 

V.  An  explanation  of  the  opinions  of  the  sect  of  the 

Karamiyah. 
VI.  An  explanation  of  the  opinions  of  the  anthropomor- 
phists,  found  among  the  numerous  sects  which  we 
have  mentioned.1 

In  each  of  these  chapters  we  shall  mention  what  it  is 
necessary  to  note,  so  it  please  Allah. 

1  Two  left  out  .  .  .  IV.  Murji'ah  and  V.  Najjariyah. 

4i 


21 


CHAPTER  I  22 

The  Sects  of  the  Rawafid 

This  chapter  explains  the  opinions  of  the  sects  of  the 
Rawafid.1 

As  we  have  already  noted,  the  sect  of  the  Zaidiyah  was 
divided  into  three  sects,  the  Kaisaniyah  into  two,  and  the 
Imamlyah  into  fifteen.  We  shall  begin  by  treating  of  the 
Zaidiyah,  then  take  up  the  Imamlyah  and  then  the  Kaisan- 
iyah in  regular  order,  so  it  please  Allah. 

i.  Concerning  the  Jarudiyah  from  among  the  Zaidiyah. 

These  are  the  followers  of  a  man  known  as  abu'l-Jarud.2 
They  claim  that  the  Prophet  designated  'All  as  Imam  by 
his  characteristics,3  but  not  by  name.  They  also  claim  that 
by  ceasing  to  recognize  'AIT,  the  Companions  became  un- 
believers. Moreover,  they  say  that  al-Hasan  ibn-'Ali  was 
Imam  after  'AH,  and  was  followed  by  his  brother  al-Husain. 
Over  this  matter  the  Jarudiyah  split  into  two  sects.  One 
sect  said :  "  Verily  'AH  designated  as  Imam  his  son  al- 
Hasan,  then  al-Hasan  designated  as  Imam  after  him  his 
brother  al-Husain.  After  al-Hasan  and  al-Husain,  the 
Imamate  became  a  matter  of  conference  among  the  children 
of  al-Hasan  and  al-Husain  " ;  the  one  of  them  who  went 
forth  from  them  (by  their  decision),  unsheathing  his  sword 
and  summoning  to  his  faith,  and  at  the  same  time  was  wise 
and  godly,  he  was  to  be  the  Imam.    The  other  sect  asserted 

1  For  term  Rafidiyah  cf.  J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  137 ■ 

2  His  full  name  is  abu-'l-Jartid  Ziyad  ibn-al-Mundhir  al-'Abdi.  Mas'udi, 
Let  Prairies  d'Or,  vol.  v,  p.  474;  Friedlander,  J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  22. 

3  Shahrastanl  gives  description:  Ibn-IIazm  omits  question  of  Imftm- 

43 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

that  the  Prophet  was  the  one  who  designated  al-Hasan  as 
23  Imam  after  'AH,  and  al-Husain  after  al-Hasan.  After  this, 
the  Jarudiyah  split  over  the  question  of  the  expected  Imam. 
One  of  their  sects  refrained  from  specifying  any  definite 
Imam,  holding  that  everyone  among  the  children  of  al- 
Hasan  and  al-Husain  who  "  unsheathes  his  sword  and 
summons  to  his  faith,  he  is  the  Imam."  Others  awaited 
Muhammad  ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn-'Ali  ibn-abi- 
Talib.  They  would  not  believe  that  he  had  been  slain,  or 
that  he  had  died,  but  claimed  that  he  was  the  expected 
Mahdl  who  would  come  to  reign  over  the  world.  This 
group  joined  with  the  Muhammadiyah  from  the  Imamiyah 
in  looking  for  Muhammad  ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn- 
'Ali  as  the  expected  Imam.  Others  awaited  Muhammad 
ibn-al-Kasim,  the  master  of  Talakan,1  and  did  not  believe 
in  his  death.  Still  others  looked  for  Muhammad  ibn-'Umar, 
the  one  who  appeared  in  al-Kufah,  refusing  to  believe  that 
he  was  slain  or  had  died.  This  is  the  doctrine  of  the 
Jarudiyah.  Their  own  heresy  is  proven  by  the  fact  that 
they  declared  the  Companions  of  the  Prophet  of  Allah  to 
be  heretics. 

2.  Concerning  the  Sulaimaniyah  2  or  the  Jaririyah  from 
among  them. 

These  followed  Sulaiman  ibn-Jarir  al-Zaidi,  who  said 
that  the  Imamate  was  a  matter  of  conference  and  could  be 
confirmed  by  an  agreement  between  two  of  the  best  men  in 
Islam.  He  went  so  far  as  to  claim  as  lawful  the  Imamate 
of  a  person  even  when  possibly  excelled  by  the  other.  He, 
however,  sanctioned  the  Imamate  of  abu-Bakr  and  'Umar, 
although  he  claimed  that  Islam  forsook  the  right  path  when 
it  invested  them    [with  the  caliphate],  because   'All  was 

1  Shahrastanl,  Haarbrucker's  translation,  vol.  i,  p.  179. 
3  Longer  account  in  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  180. 

44 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

more  eligible  to  the  Imamate  than  they.  The  sin  of  their 
recognition,  however,  did  not,  according  to  him,  constitute 
heresy  or  apostacy.  Sulaiman  ibn-Jarir  declared  unortho- 
dox those  who  reproved  him,  while  the  orthodox  in  turn 
called  Sulaiman  ibn-Jarir  unorthodox  because  he  consid- 
ered 'Uthman  unorthodox.     Allah  have  mercy  on  him.  24 

3.  Concerning  the  Butriyah. 

These  followed  two  men,1  one  of  whom  was  al-Hasan 
ibn-Salih  ibn-Hai,  and  the  other  Kathir  al-Munauwa,  who 
is  called  al-Abtar.  They  agreed  with  Sulaiman  ibn-Jarir  of 
this  group,  differing  from  him  only  in  that  they  did  not 
commit  themselves  about  'Uthman,  neither  attacking  his 
faults  nor  praising  his  virtues.  Of  the  followers  of  Sulai- 
man ibn-Jarir,  this  sect  is  the  best  thought  of  by  the  ortho- 
dox. Muslim  ibn-al-Hajjaj  2  has  cited  the  tradition  of  al- 
Hasan  ibn-Salih  ibn-Hai  in  his  collection  called  al-Sakih. 
Muhammad  ibn-Isma'il  al-Bukhari,3  although  not  citing 
him  in  his  al-Sahih,  does  say  in  his  work  entitled  al-Tafrlkh 
cd-Kabir  that  al-Hasan  ibn-Salih  ibn-Hai  al-Kufi  was  the 
pupil  of  Sammak  ibn-Harb  and  died  in  the  year  167.  He 
was  from  the  border-line  of  Hamadhan  and  his  surname 
was  abii-'Abdallah. 

'Abd-al-Kahir  says:  These  Butriyah  and  Sulaimamyah 
from  among  the  Zaidiyah,  all  of  them  called  the  Jarudiyah, 
of  the  Zaidiyah,  unorthodox,  because  they  affirmed  the 
heresy  of  abu-Bakr  and  'Umar.  The  Jarudiyah  affirmed  the 
Sulaimamyah  and  Butriyah  heretics  because  they  left  uncon- 
demned  the  heresy  of  abu-Bakr  and  'Umar.  Our  sheikh, 
abu-1-Hasan  al-Ash'ari,4  in  one  of  his  treatises  tells  of  a 
section  of  the  Zaidiyah  called  the  Ya'kubiyah,  followers  of 

1  ShahrastanI  makes  these  two  sects. 

2  De  Slane,  Ibn-Khallikan,  vol.  iii,  p.  34& 

3  Ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  594.  *  Ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  227. 

45 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

a  man  called  Ya'kub,  and  states  that  they  had  accepted  abu- 
25  Bakr  and  'Umar,  but  they  did  not  reject  those  who  rejected 
the  caliphate  of  the  two  latter.  'Abd-al-Kahir  says  that  three 
of  the  sects  of  the  Zaidlyah  that  we  have  mentioned  agreed 
on  the  view  that  those  who  commit  major  sins  within  Islam 
would  be  forever  in  hell  fire.  In  regard  to  this  they  re- 
semble the  Khawarij,  who  give  no  hope  of  Allah's  grace  to 
prisoners  of  sin  even  though  they  be  believers,  whereas  none 
but  the  unbelievers  need  really  despair  of  the  spirit 1  of 
Allah.  These  three  sects  and  their  followers  are  called 
Zaidlyah  because  of  their  acceptance  of  the  Imamate  of 
Zaid  ibn-'Ali  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn-'Ali  ibn-abi-Talib,  in  his 
time  and  the  Imamate  of  his  son,  Yahya  ibn-Zaid,  after 
him.  Zaid  ibn-'AH  was  recognized  as  Imam  by  fifteen 
thousand  men  of  the  people  of  al-Kufah  who  went  with 
him  against  the  governor  of  al-Trak,  Yusuf  ibn-'Umar  al- 
Thakafi,  governor  over  the  two  Traks  under  Hisham  ibn- 
'Abd-al-Malik.  And  when  the  war  between  him  and 
Yusuf  ibn-'Umar  al-Thakafi  had  lasted  some  time,  they 
said  unto  him :  "  We  will  help  thee  against  thine  enemies 
after  thou  hast  told  us  thy  views  regarding  abu-Bakr  and 
'Umar  who  were  unjust  to  thine  ancestor  'AH  ibn-abi-Talib." 
Zaid  said :  "  I  say  naught  against  them  except  good,  and  I 
have  never  heard  my  father  say  anything  except  good  of 
them,  and  I  have  set  out  against  the  Banu  Umaiyah  only 
because  they  fought  against  my  ancestor  al-Husain  and 
attacked  al-Madmah  on  the  day  of  al-Harrah.  They  then 
demolished  the  Beit  Allah  with  ballista  and  fire."  Where- 
upon they  deserted  him  [Zaid],  who  said  to  them:  "Do 
you  desert  me  also?"  And  from  this  day  on  they  were 
called  the  Rafidah  [Deserters].  There  then  remained 
with  him  Nasr  ibn-Harimah  al-'Ansi  and  Mu'awiyah  ibn- 

1  The  Arabic  word  used,  denotes  wind  which  brings  relief. 

46 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

Ishak  ibn-Yazid  ibn-Harithah  with  about  two  hundred  men, 
and  they  fought  the  army  of  Yusuf  ibn-'Umar  al-Thakafi    26 
until  they  were  all  killed,  including  Zaid.     He  was  after- 
wards exhumed,  crucified,  and  burned.    His  son  Yahya  ibn- 
Zaid  fled  to  Khurasan,  and  rebelled  in  the  district  of  Juza- 
jan  against  Nasr  ibn-Bashshar,  the  governor  of  Khurasan, 
who  sent  against  him  Muslim  ibn-Ahwaz  al-Mazini  with 
three  thousand  men,  and  they  killed  Yahya  ibn-Zaid.     His 
shrine  in  Juzajan  is  famous.     'Abd-al-Kahir  says  that  the 
Rawafid  of  al-Kiifah  are  remarkable  for  perfidy  and  stingi- 
ness, so  that  a  proverb  has  become  current  in  regard  to 
these  qualities  among  them  and  the  saying  has  grown  up : 
"  More  stingy  than  a  Kufite  and  more  perfidious."     Three 
instances  of  their  perfidy  have  become  widely  known.    First, 
after  the  slaying  of  'AIT,  they  recognized  al-Hasan  his  son, 
but  when  he  went  to  fight  against  Mu'awlyah,  they  seized 
him  by  treachery  in  Sabat  al-Mada'in  and  Sanan  al-Ju'fi, 
one    of   their   number,    pierced    his   side    and   threw    him 
from  his   horse;   and   this   was  one   of    the   reasons   for 
the  peace  made  with  Mu'awiyah.     The  second  instance  of 
their  perfidy  was  that  they  wrote  to  al-Husain  ibn-'Ali  and 
invited  him  to  come  to  al-Kufa  so  that  they  should  help 
him  against  Yazld  ibn-Mu'awiyah.     He  allowed  himself  to 
be  deceived   by  them,   and  accepted   their  invitation,  but 
when  he  reached  Karbela',  they  seized  him  by  treachery 
and  made  common  cause  with  'Ubaidallah  ibn-Ziyad  so  that 
al-Husain  was  killed  in  Karbila',  together  with  many  of 
his  family.     Their  third  perfidy  was  against  Yazid  ibn-'Ali 
ibn-al-Husain  ibn-'Ali  ibn-abi-Talib,   for  after  going  out 
with  him  against  Yusuf  ibn-'Umar  they  broke  their  word 
to  him   [Yazid],  which  resulted  in  his  being  killed,  and 
there  befell  what  befell. 

4.  Concerning  the  Kaisaniyah  from  among  the  Rawafkl.    ^ 
These  are  the  followers  of  al-Mukhtar  ibn-abl-'Ubaid 

47 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

al-Thakaf  1 *  who  undertook  to  avenge  the  death  of  al- 
Husain  ibn-'AH  ibn-abi-Talib.  He  killed  most  of  those  who 
had  killed  al-Husain  at  Karbila'.  He  was  al-Mukhtar,  but 
he  was  called  Kaisan.  It  is  reported  that  he  took  his  opin- 
ions from  a  freedman  who  belonged  to  'All,  whose  name 
was  Kaisan.2  The  Kaisaniyah  split  up  into  sects,  to  which 
two  opinions  are  common;  one  of  them  is  the  Imamate  of 
Muhammad  ibn-al-Hanafiyah,  whom  al-Mukhtar  ibn-abi- 
'Ubaid  was  accustomed  to  champion.  The  second  [upon 
which  they  agreed]  was  that  Allah  might  have  had  a  be- 
ginning. Because  of  this  heresy  everyone  who  does  not 
accept  this  doctrine  about  Allah,  accuses  them  of  being  un- 
orthodox. These  Kaisaniyah  split  over  the  Imamate  of 
Muhammad  ibn-al-Hanaf  lyah.  Some  of  them  claimed  that 
he  became  Imam  after  his  father  'AH  ibn-abi-Talib,  prov- 
ing this  by  the  fact  that  'All,  at  the  battle  of  the  Camels, 
gave  over  the  banner  to  him,1  and  said:  "[Carrying  this, 
attack]  as  thy  father  would  attack,  then  thou  wilt  be  praised. 
There  is  no  good  in  war  which  does  not  rage."  Others 
held  that  the  Imamate  after  'All  went  to  his  son  al-Hasan, 
then  to  al-Husain,  after  al-Hasan,  and  then  passed  over  to 
Muhammad  ibn-al-Hanafiyah  after  his  brother  al-Husain, 
by  the  last  will  of  his  brother  al-Husain,  at  the  time  when 
he  fled  from  al-Madinah  to  Mecca,  when  his  allegiance  was 
sought  for  Yazid  ibn-Mu'awiyah.  This  resulted  in  the 
splitting  off  of  those  who  hold  to  the  Imamate  of  Muham- 
mad ibn-al-Hanaf  lyah.  Some  of  those  who  are  called  al- 
Karibiyah  are  followers  of  abu-Karib  al-Darir  and  claim 
that  Muhammad  ibn-al-Hanaf  lyah  is  living  and  did  not  die, 
2&  that  he  is  in  Mt.  Radwa,  and  near  him  is  a  fount  of  water 

*J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  33.  Shahrastani  gives  two  sects, 
Kaisaniyah  and  Mukhtariyah.  This  sect  is  sometimes  even  classed 
under  the  Imamiyah.     Cf.  Ibn-Hazm's  division. 

2  Ibn-Khallikan,  De  Slane,  vol.  ii,  p.  577- 

48 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

and  a  fount  of  honey,  from  which  he  derives  his  sustenance, 
while  at  his  right,  a  lion,  and  at  his  left  a  panther  guard 
him  from  his  enemies  until  the  time  of  his  appearance.1 
He  is  the  expected  Mahdi.  The  rest  of  the  Kaisamyah  be- 
lieve in  the  death  of  Muhammad  ibn-al-Hanaf  lyah  but  dis- 
agree about  the  Imam  who  should  succeed  him.  There  were 
some  of  them  who  claimed  that  the  Imamate  after  him  re- 
verted to  the  son  of  his  brother,  'All  ibn-al-Husain  Zain 
al-'Abidin,  while  others  hold  that  after  him  it  should  revert 
to  abu-Hashim  'Abdallah  ibn-Muhammad  ibn-al-Hanaf lyah, 
so  these  split  over  the  Imam  to  succeed  abu-Hashim.  Some 
transfer  the  Imamate  to  abu-Muhammad  ibn-'Ali  ibn- 
'Abdallah  ibn-' Abbas  ibn-'Abd-al-Muttalib,  because  abu- 
Hashim  willed  it  to  him.  This  latter  is  the  view  of  the 
Rawandiyah.  Others  claimed  the  Imamate  after  abu- 
Hashim  went  to  Bayan  ibn-Sim'an,  and  they  hold  that  the 
spirit  of  Allah  was  in  abu-Hashim,  and  passed  over  from 
him  to  Bayan.  While  some  claimed  that  this  spirit  passed 
from  abu-Hashim  to  'Abdallah  ibn-'Amr  ibn-Harb.  This 
sect  claims  the  divine  character  of  the  latter.  As  to  the 
Bayamyah  and  the  Harbiyah,  both  of  them  belonging  to  the 
Ghulat  sects,  we  shall  mention  them  in  the  section  in  which 
we  mention  the  sects  of  the  Ghulat.  Kuthaiyir,  the  poet, 
was  of  the  school  of  the  Kaisamyah  who  hold  that  Mu- 
hammad ibn-al-Hanaf  lyah  is  alive,  and  do  not  believe  in  his 
death.     He  says  in  his  poem  : 2 

"  Indeed,  the  Imams  of  the  Kuraish,  the  masters  of  truth,  are  four  alike.    20 
'All  and  his   three   sons,   they   are   the   sires   about   whom   there   is 

naught  hid. 
One  sire  is  the  sire  of  faith  and  piety,  and  the  other  sire  Karbela 
reft  from  sight.3 


1  On  the  part  of  animals  in  Messianic  ideals  see  Friedlander,  J.  A. 
O.  S.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  37  ff. 

2  Kitdb  al-Aghani  8,  32.      Mas'udi,  Les  Prairies  d'Or,  vol.  v,  p.  182. 
Ibn-Kutaibah  ed.  De  Goeje,  p.  329. 

3  Mas'idi  gives  it  "  Hidden  from  all  sight/' 

49 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Ajid  a  third  does  not  taste  death  until  he  leads  the  horsemen,  the 

banner  preceding, 
He  disappeared  and  was  not  seen  among  them  for  a  season,  hidden 

in  Radwa,  near  him  are  honey  and  water."  x 

'Abd-al-Kahir  answers  these  verses  with  the  words : 

"  The  masters  of  truth  are  four,  but  as  to  the  second  of  the  two,  his 

fame  has  preceded  him, 
And  Faruk,  of  the  world,  appeared  as   Imam,   following  him   Dhul 

Nunain  who  met  his  death. 
'Ali  appeared  after  them  as   Imam,  in  the  order  in  which  I  have 

given  them. 
The  decree  came  from  above,  and  hateful  are  they  whom  we  mention 

as  accursed. 
To  the  fire  of  hell  have  they  been  relegated,  and  the  sectaries  are  a 

people  like  unto  the  Christians, 
Confused  ones,  for  their  confusion  there  is  no  healing." 

And  Kuthaiyir  also  said  about  sectaries :  2 

"lam  free  to  go  to  Allah,  and  free  from  connection  with  ibn  Arwi, 
and  free  from  the  religion  of  the  Khawarij. 
And  free  from  'Umar  and  Abu-Bakr,  at  the  time  when  he  was  declared 
emir  of  the  faithful" 

These  verses  we  have  answered  with  the  following : 

"Thou  art  indeed  free,  but  from  Allah,  through  the  hatred  of  the 

people,  through  whom  Allah  has  kept  alive  the  faithful. 

And  hatred  of  thine  harms  not  ibn-Arwa,  the  hatred  of  piety  is  the 

religion  of  the  unbelievers. 
Abw-Bakr,  I  rejoice  in  him  as  Imam,  despite  all  the  anger  of  the 
Rawafid. 
30       'Umar,  the  Faruk  of  the  world,  is  rightly  called  the  emir  of  the 
faithful" 

[Saiyid  says : 3] 

"  Say  to  al  Wasy :  '  I  would  give  my  life  for  thee,  thou  hast  stayed  in 
this  mount  a  long  time, 
They  persecute  in  the  community  those  of  us  who  follow  thee,  and 
who  proclaim  thee  caliph  and  Imam. 


1  De  Slane,  Ibn-Khallikan,  vol.  II,  p.  577. 
3  Ibn-Kutaibah,  ibid.,  p.  316.     Ibn  Arwa  =  Uthman. 
3  Mas'udi,  Les  Prairies  d'Or,  vol.  v,  p.  182. 

50 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

And  all  the  people  of  the  earth  were  inimical  to  thee  during  thy  stay 

with  them  for  sixty  years. 
The  son  of  Khawla  [name  of  the  Haniflte  mother  of  Muhammad] 

has  not  tasted  of  death,  and  the  earth  does  not  hold  his  bones.1 
And  verily  he  has  the  sustenance  of  an  Imam,  and  drink  is  provided 

and  with  it  food.' " 

This  po€m  we  answered  with  the  words : 

"  Lo  thy  life  has   passed  in  waiting,    for   the  one  whose   bones   the 

ground  holds. 
And  there  is  no  Imam  in  the  valley  of   Radwa,  around  whom   the 

angels  bandy  words. 
And  there  are  no  streams  of  honey  and  water  beside  him,  nor  is 

drink  provided,  and  with  it  food. 
And  ibn  Khawla  has  tasted  of  death,  just  as  his  father  tasted  of 

decease. 
If  any  man  could  have  lived  for  ever  on  account  of  his  greatness. 

verily  the  chosen  one  [Muhammad]  would  have  lived  for  ever." 

The  poet  known  by  the  name  of  Saiyid  al-Himyari  was 
also  of  the  school  of  the  Kaisaniyah  who  looked  for  the 
coming  of  Muhammad  ibn-al-Hanafiyah,  and  claimed  that 
he  is  imprisoned  at  Mt.  Radwa  until  he  is  called  to  appear. 
And  about  this  he  says  in  a  poem  of  his : 

"  But  everyone  who  is  on  the  earth  disappears — 
This  is  the  decree  of  him  who  created  the  Imam." 

The  first  who  arose  to  preach  the  doctrine  of  the  Kaisan- 
iyah   in   regard   to   the   Imamate    of    Muhammad    ibn-al- 
Hanafiyah  was  al-Mukhtar  ibn-abi-'Ubaid  al-Thakafl.    The    *- 
reason  for  this  was  that  'Ubaidallah  ibn-Ziyad*   when  he 
had  killed  Muslim  ibn-'Akil,    and  al-Husain  ibn-'AH,  was 

1  Not  in  Mas'udi. 

8  For  Messianic  ideals  in  Islam  cf.  Van  Vloten,  Chiitisme,  p.  54  ff.; 
Friedlander,  "Die  Messias  Idee  im  Islam"  (in  Festschrift  zum  joten 
Geburtstage  A.  Berliner's,  Frankfurt  A.  M.  1903,  pp.  1 16-130,  especially 
pp.  121  ff.  and  p.  127.) 

3  Tabarl,  Chronique;  ed.  Zotenberg,  vol.  iv,  p.  18  et  seq. 

4  Ibid.,  vol.  iv,  p.  34. 

51 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

told  that  al-Mukhtar  ibn-abi-'Ubaid  was  one  of  those  who 
had  rebelled  with  Muslim  ibn-'Aldl.  He  had  then  disap- 
peared, and  when,  having  been  ordered  to  return,  he  came 
to  ibn-Ziyad,  the  latter  threw  a  club  which  was  in  his  hand 
and  cut  his  eye.  He  then  imprisoned  him.  Some  of  the 
people,  however,  plead  with  him  in  favor  of  al-Mukhtar,  so 
that  he  brought  him  out  of  prison  and  said  to  him :  "  I  give 
thee  three  days,  and  lo  during  that  time  thou  shalt  go  away 
from  al-Kufah,  else  I  will  behead  thee."  Al-Mukhtar  then 
fled  from  al-Kufah  to  Mecca,  where  he  swore  allegiance  to 
'Abdallah  ibn-al-Zubair,1  remaining  with  him  until  ibn-al- 
Zubair  fought  the  army  of  Yazid  ibn-Mu'awiyah,  which 
was  under  the  command  of  al-Husain  ibn-Numair  al-Sukuti. 
Al-Mukhtar  distinguished  himself  in  these  wars  against  the 
people  of  Syria.  Then  Yazid  ibn-Mu'awiyah  died,  and  the 
Syrian  army  returned  to  Syria  while  the  command  of  al- 
Hijaz.  al-Yaman,  al-Trak  and  Persia  remained  with  ibn-al- 
Zubair.  Al-Mukhtar  having  suffered  evil  treatment  from 
ibn-al-Zubair,  fled  to  al-Kufah.  The  governor  of  this  city 
was  at  that  time  'Abdallah  ibn- Yazid  al-Ansari,2  under 
'Abdallah  ibn-al-Zubair.  When  he  [al-Mukhtar]  entered 
al-Kufah  he  sent  his  messengers  to  the  sectaries  of  al- 
Kufah  and  its  districts  up  to  al-Mada'in  demanding  their 
allegiance  to  him  and  promising  them  that  he  was  coming 
to  claim  their  revenge  for  al-Husain  ibn-' AH.  He  invited 
them  to  recognize  Muhammad  ibn-al-Hanafiyah,  claiming 
that  al-Hanaf lyah  had  chosen  him  as  caliph,  and  that  it  was 
he  [al-Hanafiyah]  who  had  commanded  them  to  obey  him 
32  [al-Mukhtar].  It  was  at  this  time  that  ibn-al-Zubair  re- 
moved 'Abdallah  ibn- Yazid  al-Ansari  from  the  governor- 
ship of  al-Kufah  and  put  in  his  place  'Abdallah  ibn-Mutr 
al-'Adawi.    The  number  of  those  who  recognized  al-Mukh- 

1  Ibid.,  vol.  iii,  p.  610  et  seq. 
*Ibi4.,  vol.  iv,  pp.  58,  66,  69,  81. 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

tar  *  and  gathered  around  him  amounted  to  seventeen  thou- 
sand.    Among  them  was  'Ubaidallah  ibn-al-Hirr,  who  en- 
tered into  allegiance  with  him.    There  was  no  braver  than 
al-Hirr   in   his    day.      Ibrahim    ibn-Malik    al-Ashtar   also 
joined  2  al-Mukhtar.     Among  the  secretaries  of  al-Kufah 
there   was   not   a  finer   one   than   he,    nor   one   who   had 
more    followers.      Al-Mukhtar    set    out    with    these    men 
against  the  governor  of  al-Kufah,  'Abdallah  ibn-Muti',  who 
on  that  day  was  at  the  head  of  twenty  thousand.3     The 
strife  between  them  lasted  for  several  days.    At  the  end  of 
this  time  the  Zaidiyah  were  defeated  and  fled,  and  al-Mukh- 
tar made  himself  governor  over  al-Kufah  and  its  surround- 
ings.    He  also  killed  all  those  in  al-Kufah  who  had  fought 
against  al-Husain  ibn-'AH  at  Karbila'.     Then  he  delivered 
the  khutbah  before  the  people  and   said :   "  Praise  be  to 
Allah  who  promised  his  friend  victory  and  his  enemy  harm, 
and  definitely  put  both  of  them  in  this  condition,  a  final  dis- 
position of  them  and  a  decisive  settlement.     O  men,  we 
have  heard  the  invitation  of  the  preacher  and  we  have 
received  the  view  of  the  preacher  how  many  tyrants,  male 
and   female,   and  how  many  murderers  do  we   recall  ?"  4 
Bring  hither  the  servants  of  Allah  to  swear  allegiance  to 
the  proper  leader  and  to  fight  the  enemy,  and  lo,  I  am  the 
leader  of  those  who  mourn,  and  the  investigator  of  the 
murder  of  the   son   of   the   daughter   of  the   seal  of   the 
prophets."     He  then  descended  from  his  pulpit  and  sent  a 
message  by  the  head  of  his  body-guard  to  the  house  of 
'Umar  ibn-Sa'd,5  to  cut  off  his  head.     He  then  cut  off  the 

1  Wellhausen,  Religios-P  otitis  chen  Oppositionsparteien  im  Alten  Islam, 
pp.  28  et  seq. 

2  Tabari,  Chronique  ed.  Zotenberg,  vol.  iv,  pp.  81  et  seq. 

3  Ibid.,  vol.  iv,  pp.  81  et  seq. 

4  Ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  632. 

5  Ibid.,  vol.  iv,  p.  75  et  seq. 

53 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

head  of  his  son  Ja'far  ibn-'Umar  who  was  the  son  of  the 
sister  of  al-Mukhtar,  and  he  said :  "  That  is  for  the  head  of 
al-Husain;  and  this  is  for  the  head  of  the  son  of  al-Husain 
33  the  great."  After  this  he  sent  Ibrahim  ibn-Malik  al-Ashtar 
with  six  thousand  men  for  the  battle  against  'Ubaidallah 
ibn-Ziyad,  who  was  at  that  time  in  al-Mausil  with  eighty 
thousand  of  the  Syrian  army,  over  whom  'Abd-al-Malik  ibn- 
Marwan1  had  placed  him  as  governor.  When  the  two 
armies  met  at  the  gate  of  al-Mausil,  the  Syrian  army  was 
put  to  flight  and  seventy  thousand  of  them  were  killed  on 
the  field  of  battle,  including  'Ubaidallah  ibn-Ziyad  and  al- 
Husain  ibn-Numair  al-Sukuti.  Ibrahim  ibn-al-Ashtar  sent 
their  heads  to  al-Mukhtar,  who,  when  he  had  succeeded  in 
becoming  governor  of  al-Kufah,  al-Jazirah  and  of  al-Mahin 
[Persia]  as  far  as  the  border  of  Armenia,  claimed  that  he 
was  a  kahin,  who  wrote  rhymed  prose  like  the  rhymed  prose 
of  the  kahins.  It  is  also  said  that  he  claimed  an  inspira- 
tion had  come  to  him ;  and  a  specimen  of  his  rhymed  prose 
is  as  follows :  "  By  him  who  has  sent  down  the  Koran;  and 
revealed  the  Book;  and  given  the  laws  for  religion;  and 
who  disapproves  of  disobedience;  I  will  kill  al-Nu'at 2  of 
al-Azd  and  'Uman,  and  of  Madhhij  and  Hamadhan,  and  of 
Nahd  and  Khaulan,  and  of  Bakr  and  of  Hazzan,  and  of 
Thu'al  and  of  Nabhan,  and  of  'Abs  and  of  Dhubyan,  and 
of  Kais  and  of  'Allan."  Then  he  said  :  "  By  the  All-hearing 
onej  the  Knowing,  the  Mighty,  the  Lofty,  the  Powerful,  the 
Wise,  the  Merciful,  the  Compassionate,  verily  I  will  crush 
completely  the  leaders  of  the  Bani  Tahim  [Tamim?]." 

Then  the  news  of  al-Mukhtar  reached  ibn-al-Hanafiyah 
and  he  was  afraid  of  a  religious  strife,  and  desired  to  go 
against  al-'Irak  so  that  those  who  believed  in  his  Imamate 
should  gather  around  him.     Al-Mukhtar,  hearing  this,  was 

1  Ibid.,  vol.  iv,  p.  75  et  seq. 

s  I.  Goldziher,  Abhandhmgen  zur  Arabischen  Philologie,  p.  65. 

54 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

afraid  of  his  arrival  in  al-Trak,  for  fear  he  would  rob  him 
of  his  leaders  and  governors.     So  he  said  to  his  army :  "  I 
swear  allegiance  to  the  Mahdi,  but  the  Mahdi  has  a  sign, 
c.  g.,  that  he  shall  be  struck  by  a  blow  of  a  sword,  and  the 
sword  shall  not  cut  his  skin;  such  a  man  is  the  Mahdi."    34 
This  speech  of  his  was  reported  to  ibn-al-Hanafiyah,  and 
he  remained  in  Mecca  fearing  that  al-Mukhtar  might  kill 
him  if  he  went  to  al-Kufah.     Then  the  Sabbabiyah  of  the 
Ghulat  of  the  Randan  tricked  al-Mukhtar,  and  said  to  him : 
"  Thou  art  the  ultimate  authority  of  this  age."  *    And  they 
persuaded  him  to  claim  that  he  was  a  prophet.    This  he  did, 
asserting  among  his  intimates  that  a  revelation  had  come 
down  to  him,  whereupon  he  said  in  rhymed  prose :  "  By 
the  hurrying  of  the  clouds,  and  by  the  heavy  punishment, 
and  by  the  swift  reckoning,  and  by  the  rich  giver,  and  by 
the  powerful  conqueror,  verily  I  shall  open  the  grave  of 
ibn-Shihab,  the  betrayer,  the  liar,  the  unbelieving  sinner. 
Again,  by  the  Lord  of  the  two  worlds,  and  by  the  Lord  of 
the  faithful  land,  verily  I  will  kill  the  hateful  poet,  the  rajiz 
[ra/<2£-metre]  poet  of  the  heretics,  and  the  friends  of  the 
heretics,   and  the  supporters  of  the  unrighteous,  and  the 
brothers  of  satans,  who  gathered  together  for  worthless 
objects,  and   forged  tales  against  me.     Hail  to  those  of 
praiseworthy  character;  and  of  good  deeds  and  of  ready 
thought,  and  fortunate  soul."    After  this  he  preached  and 
said  in  his  khutbah:  "  Praise  be  unto  Allah,  who  has  made 
me  a  knowing  one,  and  has  enlightened  my  heart.    By  Allah, 
verily  I  will  burn  the  dwelling  places  in  this  region.     And 
verily  I  will  open  the  graves  there.    And  verily  I  will  save 
some  of  them.     And  Allah  is  sufficient  as  a  leader  and 
helper."     Then  he  swore  and  said:  "  By  the1  Lord  of  the 
sacred  enclosure,  and  by  the  sacred  house,  and  by  the  hon- 

1  De  Slane,  Ibn-Khallikan,  vol.  i,  p.  229 ;  ii,  p.  12. 

55 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

ored  comer  of  the  Ka'bah,  and  by  the  esteemed  mosque, 
and  by  the  possessor  of  the  pen;  verily  a  standard  will  be 
raised  for  me  from  here  to  Adam/  and  then  to  the  borders 
of  Dhi  Salam."  Then  he  said :  "  Verily,  by  the  lord  of 
heaven,  fire  shall  be  sent  down  from  heaven;  and  verily  it 
35  will  burn  the  house  of  Asma'."  These  words  reached  Asma' 
ibn-Kharijah  and  he  said :  "  Abu-Ishak  has  attacked  me  in 
rhymed  prose  and  now  he  will  burn  my  house."  So  he  fled 
from  his  house,  and  al-Mukhtar  sent  someone  to  burn  his 
house  during  the  night,  pretending  to  those  around  him 
that  fire  from  heaven  was  sent  down  to  burn  it.  It  was  after 
this  that  the  people  of  al-Kufah  went  out  against  al-Mukh- 
tar for  posing  as  a  kahin.2  The  Sabbabiyah  gathered 
around  him,  together  with  the  slaves  of  the  people  of  al- 
Kufah,  because  he  had  promised  to  give  them  the  possessions 
of  their  masters.  And  he  fought  with  them  against  those 
who  had  gone  out  against  him,  conquering  them  and  killing 
most  of  them:  the  rest  he  took  prisoner,  and  among  these 
was  a  man  called  Surakah  ibn-Mirdas  al-Bariki;  he  was 
brought  to  al-Mukhtar,  and  fearing  that  the  latter  would 
order  his  death,  he  said  to  those  who  imprisoned  him  and 
brought  him  to  al-Mukhtar :  "  Ye  are  not  the  ones  who 
have  taken  us  prisoners,  nor  are  ye  the  ones  that  have  de- 
feated us  with  your  force ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  the  angels 
who  have  defeated  us,  the  angels  whom  we  saw  on  mottled 
horses  above  your  soldiers."  Al-Mukhtar  admired  his 
words,  and  freed  him,  whereupon  he  went  to  Mus'ab  ibn- 
al-Zubair  in  al-Basrah,  and  from  there  he  wrote  these  verses 
to  al-Mukhtar : 3 

1  Wide  valley  in  al-Hijaz.     Cf.  Mitller,  al-Hamadani :  Geographic  der 
Arabischen  Halbinsel,  p.  171. 

3  Abu'l-Mahasin,  vol.  i,  p.  198,  ed.  Juynboll. 

3  Variants  in  Kitdb  al-Aghdnl  vol.  vii,  p.  32.     Cf.  Dinawari,  Kitdb  al- 
Akhbdr  al-Tiwdl,  p.  309.     Pub.  by  Vladimir  Giurgass. 

56 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

"  Lo,  tell  abi-Ishak  that  I  have  seen  silent  the  mottled  black  [horses] 
I  show  my  eyes  what  neither  of  them  sees,  and  what  they  both  believe 

to  be  an  invention. 
I  denounce  your  revelation,  and  take  a  vow  to  fight  you  until  death." 

In  what  we  have  here  recounted  is  to  be  found  the  reason 
of  al-Mukhtar' s  posing  as  a  kahin,  and  claiming  a  revelation 
for  himself.  xA.s  to  the  reason  for  his  words  claiming  that 
Allah  may  have  had  a  beginning,  the  following  incident  ex- 
plains it.  When  Ibrahim  ibn-al-Ashtar  heard  that  al-Mukh- 
tar was  posing  as  a  kahin  and  claiming  inspiration  for  him- 
self, he  ceased  his  help  and  governed  the  territory  of  Meso-  3^ 
potamia  for  himself.  When  Mus'ab  ibn-al-Zubair  learned 
that  Ibrahim  ibn-al-Ashtar  had  deserted  al-Mukhtar,  he 
longed  to  subdue  al-Mukhtar.  In  this,  he  was  joined  by 
'Ubaidallah  ibn-al-Hirr  al-Ju'afi  and  Muhammad  ibn-al- 
Ash'ath  al-Kindi,1  as  well  as  most  of  the  leaders  of  al- 
Kufah,  who  were  irritated  against  al-Mukhtar  for  having 
seized  their  possessions  and  slaves ;  the  latter  inciting  Mus'ab 
to  covet  the  seizure  of  al-Kufah  by  force.  Mus'ab  set  forth 
from  al-Basrah  with  seven  thousand  men  of  his  own,  in  ad- 
dition to  those  leaders  of  al-Kufah  who  had  made  common 
cause  with  him.  As  commander  over  the  van  of  his  army 
he  set  al-Muhallab  ibn-abu-Sufrah  2  with  his  following  of 
the  Azd.  The  command  of  the  cavalry  he  gave  to  'Ubai- 
dallah ibn-Ma'mar  3  al-Taiml.  Over  the  Tamimite  cavalry 
he  placed  al-Ahnaf  ibn-Kais.4  When  news  of  them  reached 
al-Mukhtar,  he  sent  out  his  commander  Ahmad  ibn-Shumait 
to  fight  Mus'ab  with  three  thousand  picked  soldiers,  telling 
them  that  the  victory  would  be  theirs.  He  claimed  that  a 
revelation  had   come   to  him   concerning  this.     The   two 

1  Tabarl,  ibid.,  vol.  v,  p.  97. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  iv,  p.  97. 

5  Ibid.,  vol.  iii,  pp.  513,  563. 
*  Ibid.,  vol.  iii,  p.  449  et  seq. 

57 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

armies  met  at  al-Mada'in,  and  the  followers  of  al-Mukhtar 
were  put  to  flight,  and  their  emir,  ibn-Shumait,  was  killed, 
together  with  most  of  al-Mukhtar's  leaders.  And  the  rem- 
nant returned  to  al-Mukhtar  and  said  to  him :  "  Why  didst 
thou  promise  us  victory  over  our  enemies?"  And  he  said: 
"  Indeed,  Allah  has  promised  this  to  me,  but  he  suddenly 
changed  his  mind."  He  went  on  to  prove  this  regarding 
Allah  with  the  words  of  the  Koran :  "  What  he  pleaseth 
will  God  abrogate  or  confirm."  x  And  this  is  how  the 
Kaisaniyah  came  to  believe  that  Allah  may  have  had  a  be- 
ginning. 
37  Al-Mukhtar  then  took  upon  himself  the  killing  of  Mus'ab 
ibn  al-Zubair  in  al-Madhar 2  in  the  region  of  al-Kuf  ah.  And 
in  this  engagement  Muhammad  ibn-al-Ash'ath  al-Kindi  was 
killed.  Al-Mukhtar  said :  "  His  death  pleases  me  because 
he  is  the  only  one  remaining  of  those  who  killed  al-Husain, 
and  now  I  am  not  afraid  of  death."  After  this  al-Mukhtar 
and  his  allies  were  put  to  flight,  and  they  fled  to  the  resi- 
dence of  the  Imam  in  al-Kufah,  and  fortified  themselves  in 
it  with  four  hundred  followers.  And  Mus'ab  besieged  them 
three  days  until  their  food  gave  out,  and  on  the  fourth  day 
they  made  a  sally,  seeking  death,  and  were  slaughtered,  and 
al-Mukhtar  was  killed  with  them.  Two  brothers  called 
Tarif  and  Tarif  killed  him;  they  were  the  sons  of  'Abdallah 
ibn-Dajajah  of  the  Banu  Hanifah.  A'sha  Hamdan  *  says 
about  them : 

"I  have  prophesied,  and  the  prophets  have  gained  renown, 
Through  the  evil  things  that  happened  in  al-Madhar, 
And  I  am  naturally  not  pleased  with  the  destruction  of  my  people 
Even  if  it  happened,  for  they  were  in  an  evil  strait. 
But  I  rejoice  over  that  which  abu-Ishak  suffers,  through  mortification 
and  shame." 


1  Surah,  13,  v.  39. 

2  Yakut,  vol.  iv,  p.  468. 

s  Kitdb  al-Aghdni,  vol.  v,  pp.  146-161. 

58 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

This  is  an  explanation  of  the  view  of  the  Kaisaniyah  that 
Allah  may  have  a  beginning.     But  some  of  the  Kaisaniyah 
who  looked  for  Muhammad  ibn-al-Hanafiyah  differed  over 
this  latter  question,  claiming  that  he  was  alive,  imprisoned 
at  Mt.  Radwa,  till  the  time  of  his  summoning.     Over  the 
reason  of  his  imprisonment  there,  they  disagreed;   some 
saying  that  "  Allah  is  secret  in  his  affairs,  no  one  knows 
them  except  he,  and  he  gives  no  explanation  for  the  reason 
of  his  imprisonment."     While  others  said :  "  Verily  Allah 
punished  him  by  this  imprisonment,  because  after  the  death 
of  al-Husain  ibn-'AH  he  went  over  to  Yazid  ibn-Mu'awiyah,    38 
and  because  he  demanded  peace  of  him,  and  accepted  lar- 
gesses from  him.',     Moreover  because  he  fled  from  ibn-al- 
Zubair  in  Mecca  to  'Abd  al-Malik  ibn-Marwan.     And  they 
claimed  that  his  companion  'Amir  ibn-Wathilah  al-Kinam  x 
came  before  him,  and  spoke  to  his  followers  about  this  de- 
parture of  his  in  the  following  words  :"Omy  brothers,  O 
my  helpers,  do  not  depart,  but  stand  by  the  Mahdi,  so  that 
ye  may  be  led.     O  Muhammad,  the  generous  one,  O  Mu- 
hammad, thou  art  the  Imam,  the  pure,  the  right  leader,  not 
ibn-al-Zubair  al-Samiri,  the  heretic,  nor  is  he  the  one  whom 
we  set  up  as  a  goal."     But  it  was  said  that  he  should  have 
fought  ibn-al-Zubair,  and  not  have  fled.     By  refusing  to 
fight  him  he  disobeyed  his  master,  and  further  disobeyed 
him  by  seeking  out  'Abd-al-Malik  ibn-Marwan.     But  even 
before  this  he  had  been  disobedient  by  seeking  out  Yazid 
ibn-Mu'awiyah.    It  was  after  this  that  he  mended  his  ways, 
and  joined  ibn-Marwan  in  al-Ta'if.     And  ibn-' Abbas  died 
there,  and  was  buried  there  by  ibn-al-Hanafiyah.     From 
there  the  latter  went  to  al-Dhar  [in  Khurasan,  near  Buk- 
hara] .    But  as  to  what  occurred  when  he  reached  the  pass 
of  Radwa,  they  differ.     Those  believing  in  his  death,  hold 
that  he  died  there;  while  those  expecting  his  return  say  that 

1  Tabarl,  ibid.,  vol.  iv,  p.  130. 

59 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Allah  imprisoned  him  there,  and  hid  him  from  the  eyes  of 
men,  as  a  punishment  for  the  sins  which  they  attributed  to 
him,  until  he  is  bidden  to  come  forth.  And  he  is  the  ex- 
pected Mahdi. 

5.  Concerning  the  Imamiyah  of  the  Rafidah. 

These  are  the  Imamiyah  who  divided  off  from  the  Zaid- 
lyah,  the  Kaisaniyah,  and  the  Ghulat  into  fifteen  sects : 1 
the  Kamiliyah,  the  Muhammadiyah,  the  Bakiriyah,  the 
39  Nawisiyah,  the  Shamitiyah,  the  'Amariyah,  the  Isma'iliyah, 
the  Mubarakiyah,  the  Musawiyah,  the  Kati'iyah,  the  Twelv- 
ers (Ithna  'Ashariyah),  the  Hishamiyah,  the  Zarariyah, 
the  Yunusiyah,  and  the  Shaitaniyah. 

a.  Concerning  the  Kamiliyah  from  among  them  : 

These  are  the  followers  of  a  man  from  the  Rafidah  who 
was  known  as  abu-Kamil.2  He  claimed  that  the  Compan- 
ions were  unorthodox  because  they  forsook  their  allegiance 
to  'All,  and  he  condemned  kAli  for  ceasing  to  fight  them,  as 
he  was  bound  to  fight  the  people  of  Siffin.  Bashshar  ibn- 
Burd,3  the  blind  poet,  belonged  to  this  school.  The  report 
is  that  someone  said  to  him :  "  What  is  thy  opinion  regard- 
ing the  Companions?"  And  he  replied  that  they  were  un- 
orthodox. He  was  then  asked :  "  And  what  is  thy  opinion 
of  'All?"     And  he  quoted  the  words  of  the  poet: i 

"  What  is  the  evil  of  the  three  caliphs  O  Umm  'Umar 
Against  thy  friend  who  does  not  accompany  us  ?  " 

1  Ibn-FIazm  is  vague  as  to  divisions.  Shahrastanl  gives  the  Imamiyak 
alone;  under  the  Bakiriyah,  and  Ja'farlyah,  he  gives  the  Nawisiyah, 
Aftahlyah,  Shamitiyah,  Musawiyah,  Isma'iliyah  and  Twelvers. 

2  Shahrastanl,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  201. 

3  Brockelmann,  Arabische  Literatur,  vol  i,  p.  73.  Von  Kremer,  Kuliur- 
geschichtliche  Streifzuge,  pp.  37  et  seq.  Goldziher,  Muhammedonische 
Studien,  p.  162.     Ibn-Kutaibah,  Kitdb  al-Shi'r,  ed.  Cairo,  p.  188. 

4  Kitdb  al-Aghdni,  vol.  iii,  pp.  19-72;  vol.  vi,  pp.  47-52. 

6b 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

It  is  also  reported  that  to  this  sin  of  condemning  the  Com- 
panions and  'AH  among  them,  Bashshar  added  two  other 
sins :  one  the  belief  that  the  dead  would  return  to  the  world 
before  the  day  of  resurrection,  as  the  partisans  of  the  Re- 
turn 1  hold  among  the  Rafidah,  and  the  other,  that  Satan 
is  right  in  preferring  fire  to  earth.  As  a  proof  of  this  they 
gave  the  views  of  Bashshar  in  one  of  his  poems : 

"  The  earth  is  dark  and  fire  is  light, 
And  fire  has  been  worshipped  since  it  existed." 

To  this  Saf wan  al-Ansari  replied  in  the  following  poem : 

"Thou  didst  think  that  fire  was  the  finest  thing  as  to  its  origin 
And  upon  the  earth  it  is  lighted  by  means  of  stone  and  fire-stick 
And  wonderful  things  were  formed  in  its  innermost  parts  which  can    4" 

not  be  counted  in  line  or  in  number. 
And  in  the  very  depths  of  the  seas  there  are  useful  things. 

You  blame  the  moons,  even  though  you  are  deformed,  and  nearest    42 
among  the  creations  of  Allah,  to  the  genus  ape." 

Hammad  u  'Ajrad  satarized  Bashshar  and  said: 

"  O,  thou  who  art  viler  than  an  ape,  even  when  the  ape  is  blind." 
It  is  reported,  however,  that  Bashshar  was  untroubled  by 
the  satire  in  this  verse,  and  merely  replied : 

"  Let  him  see  me  and  describe  me, 
Only  may  I  not  see  and  describe  him." 

•Abd  al-Kahir  says:  "I  declare  these  Kamiliyah  unortho- 
dox for  two  reasons.  First  because  they  condemn  all  of 
the  Companions  without  specification,  and  secondly  because 
they  preferred  fire  to  earth.  Some  of  the  disgraceful  here- 
sies of  Bashshar  ibn-Burd  we  have  mentioned;  and  we  feel 
that  Allah  has  done  to  him  what  he  deserves,  for  he  satir- 

iRaj'ah=:  return  as  same  person.     Tandsukh  =  return  as  a  different 
being. 

2  Ibn-Kutaibah  ed.  De  Goeje,  p.  49°- 

6i 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

ized  the  Mahdi,  who  therefore  commanded  him  to  be 
thrown  into  the  Tigris,  which  is  a  disgrace  to  him  in  this 
world,  and  to  his  followers,  a  painful  punishment  in  the 
next." 

b.  Concerning  the  Muhammadiyah.1 
These  expect  Muhammad  ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn- 
al-Husain  ibn-'Ali  ibn-abi-Talib ;  nor  do  they  believe  that 
he  was  murdered,  nor  that  he  died ;  they  claim  that  he  is  in 
Mt.  Hajir,  in  the  district  of  Najd,  until  he  shall  be  com- 
43  manded  to  return.  In  the  error  of  his  anthropomorphistic 
ideas  al-Mughirah  ibn-Sa'id  al-Tjli 2  said  to  his  compan- 
ions :  "  Verily  the  expected  Mahdi  is  Muhammad  ibn-'Ab- 
dallah  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn-al-Husain  ibn-'AH."  As  the  proof 
of  this  he  claimed  that  his  name  was  the  same  as  that  of 
Muhammad  the  Prophet  of  Allah;  and  his  father's  name 
was  'Abdallah  like  the  name  of  the  father  of  the  Prophet  of 
Allah.  And  in  a  hadlth  dating  from  the  time  of  the  Prophet, 
he  quotes  these  words  about  the  Mahdi :  3  "  His  name  will 
correspond  to  my  name,  and  his  father's  name  to  the  name 
of  my  father."  And  when  Muhammad  ibn-' Abdallah  ibn- 
al-Hasan  ibn-al-Husain  ibn-'AH  began  his  preaching  in  al- 
Madinah,  he  made  himself  master  of  Mecca  and  al-Madi- 
nah,  while  his  brother 4  Ibrahim  ibn-' Abdallah  made  himself 
governor  of  al-Basrah  and  their  third  brother  Idrls  ibn- 
'  Abdallah  took  possession  of  several  of  the  districts  of  the 
Maghrib.5  That  was  in  the  time  of  the  caliph  abu-Ja'far 
al-Mansur,    Avho  sent    'Isa   ibn-Musa  with   a   large   army 

1J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  30.     Not  to  be  confused  with  the  Mukasa- 
madiyah  who  believe  in  the  divinity  of  Muhammad  the  Prophet. 

2  Shahrastani,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  pp.  203,  218. 

3  Friedlander,  J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix.,  pp.  43  e t  seq. 
47abarl,  ibid.,  vol.  iv,  p.  326. 

9  Ibid.,  voL  iv,  p.  458. 

62 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

against    Muhammad    ibn-'Abdallah    ibn-al-Hasan    ibn-al- 
Husain.    They  fought  and  killed  Muhammad  in  a  battle  at 
al-Madmah.     He  then  sent  'Isa  ibn-Musa  to  make  war  on 
Ibrahim  ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn-al-Husain  ibn-'AH. 
They  killed  Ibrahim  at  the  gate  of  Himrin,  sixteen  para- 
sangs  from  al-Kufah.    It  was  in  this  sedition  that  Idris  ibn- 
'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn-al-Husain  died  in  al-Maghrib. 
They  say  he  was  poisoned  there.     The  father  of  these  three 
brothers,  'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn-al-Husain,  died  in  the 
jail  of  al-Mansur.     His  tomb  is  in  al-Kadisiyah  and  is  well   44 
known  and   frequented  by  pilgrims.     When   Muhammad 
ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn-al-Husain  was  killed  in  al- 
Madinah,  the  Mughiriyah  divided  into  two  sects,  one  of 
which  acknowledged  his  death  and  denounced  al-Mughirah 
ibn-Sa'Id  al-Tjli.    This  sect  said  :  "  Indeed,  he  lied  when  he 
said  that   Muhammad   ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn-al- 
Husain  was  the  Mahdi  who  should  rule  the  earth,  for  he  has 
been  killed  and  does  not  rule  the  earth."     The  other  sect 
persisted  in  its  adherence  to  al-Mughirah  ibn-Sa'id  al- Ijli. 
saying:  "Indeed,  he  is  right  in  saying  that  the  Mahdi  is 
Muhammad  ibn-'Abdallah ;  verily  he  was  not  killed,  but  has 
merely  disappeared  from  the  sight  of  men,  and  is  on  Mt. 
Hajir  in  the  region  of  Najd,  remaining  there  until  he  is 
commanded  to  return.     He  will  return  and  rule  the  earth, 
and  allegiance  will  be  paid  him  in  Mecca  between  the  comer 
of  the  Ka'bah  and  the  Makam.1     At  that  time,  seventeen 
men  will  be  brought  to  life,  each  one  of  whom  will  be  given 
one  of  the  letters  from  the  name  of  the  most  Holy,  and  they 
will  put  the  armies  to  flight."     These  claim  that  the  one 
whom  the  army  of  'Isa  ibn-Musa  killed  in  al-Madinah  was 
not  Muhammad  ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan.     This  sect  is 
called  al-Muhammadiyah,  because  they  look  for  the  coming 

1  Halting  place  for  prayer. 

63 


45 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

of  Muhammad  ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan.  Jabir  ibn-Yazid 
al-Ju'afi  belonged  to  this  sect.  He  was  wont  to  speak  of 
the  return  of  the  dead  to  this  world  before  the  resurrection. 
On  this  subject,  a  poet  of  this  sect  has  said  in  one  of  his 
poems : 

"  Up  to  the  day  in  which  men  return 
To  their  world  before  their  day  of  reckoning." 

Those  who  hold  our  views  say  to  this  sect :  "  If  you  assert 
that  he  who  was  killed  in  al-Madinah  was  other  than  Mu- 
hammad ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan,  and  you  assert  that 
the  one  killed  there  was  Satan  transformed  into  man 
in  the  person  of  Muhammad  ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan, 
then  believe  also  that  those  killed  at  Karbila  were  other 
than  al-Husain  and  his  companions,  that  they  were  only 
devils  having  put  on  the  form  of  men  in  the  person  of  al- 
Husain  and  his  companions ;  then  look  for  al-Husain  as  ye 
look  for  Muhammad  ibn-'Abdallah  ibn-al-Hasan,  or  then 
look  for  'All  as  the  Sabbabiyah  among  you  look  for  him. 
They  claim  that  he  is  among  the  clouds,  and  that  the  one 
whom  'Abd-al-Rahman  ibn-Muljim  killed  was  Satan  trans- 
formed into  a  man  in  the  person  of  'AH."  This  shows  there 
is  no  difference  between  them  and  him.  May  Allah  be 
praised  for  this. 

c.  Concerning  the  Bakiriyah  among  them. 

This  people  transfer  the  Imamate  from  'All  ibn-abi- 
Talib,  through  his  children  to  Muhammad  ibn-'AH,  the  one 
who  was  known  as  al-Bakir.  They  say :  "  Verily,  'AH 
designated  his  son  al-Hasan  for  the  Imamate;  al-Hasan 
designated  his  brother  al-Husain ;  al-Husain  designated  his 
son  'AH  ibn-al-Husain  Zain-al-'Abidin  and  Zain-al-'Abidin 
called  to  the  Imamate  Muhammad  ibn-'AH  known  as  al- 
Bakir:  they  claim  that  he  is  the  expected  Mahdi,  concern- 

64 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

ing  whom  it  is  related  that  the  prophet  said  to  Jabir  ibn- 
'Abdallah  al-Ansari :  *  "  Verily,  thou  wilt  see  him  and 
greet  him  from  me."  Jabir  was  the  last  of  the  Compan- 
ions to  die  in  al-Madinah.  It  happened  that  he  was  blind 
at  the  end  of  his  life,  and  was  wont  to  go  around  in  al- 
Madinah  exclaiming,  "  O  Bakir,  O  Bakir,  when  shall  I 
meet  thee?"  On  a  certain  day  he  passed  through  one  of 
the  streets  of  al-Madinah  ....  [page  wanting  in  the 
original  ms.].  Ja'far  designated  his  son  Isma'il  to  the  46 
Imamate  after  him;  when  Isma'il  died  during  the  life  of 
his  father,  we  learned  that  he  had  designated  his  son  merely 
to  guide  the  people  to  choose  as  Imam  his  son  Muhammad 
ibn-Isma'il.  It  is  to  this  view  that  the  Isma'Iliyah  of  the 
Batimyah  inclined.  We  will  mention  them  later  among  the 
sects  of  the  Ghulat. 

d.  Concerning  the  sect  of  the  Musawiyah  from  among 
them. 

These  are  the  ones  who  transferred  the  Imamate  to 
Ja'far.2  Then  they  claimed  that  the  Imam  after  Ja'far 
was  his  son  Musa  ibn- Ja'far,  and  they  claimed  that  Musa. 
ibn- Ja'far  3  was  alive,  and  not  dead,  and  that  he  was  the 
expected  Mahdi.  They  said  that  he  went  into  the  house  of 
al-Rashid  and  has  not  come  forth  from  it;  [adding]  we  are 
sure  of  his  Imamate ;  but  we  have  doubts  of  his  death  and 
we  would  not  decide  on  it  without  proof."  And  it  was 
said  to  this  sect  which  was  called  the  Musawiyah :  "  If  you 
doubt  his  being  alive  and  his  death,  then  doubt  his  Imam- 
ate, and  do  not  assert  definitely  that  he  is  in  existence  and 
that  he  is  the  expected  Mahdi;  all  the  more  so  since  you 
know  that  the  burial-place  of  Musa  ibn- Ja'far  is  well  known 

1  Ibn-IJajar,  Biographical  Dictionary,  vol.  i,  p.  432. 
'2  De  Slane,  Ibn-Khallikan,  vol.  i,  p.  300. 
3  Ibid.,  vol.  iii,  p.  463- 

65 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

in  the  western  part  of  Baghdad,  and  is  visited."  And  this 
sect  is  called  the  Musawiyah  because  it  looks  for  Musa  ibn- 
Ja'far;  and  it  is  also  called  the  Mamturah  because  Yunus 
ibn-kAbd-al-Rahman  al-Kummi  was  among  the  al-Kati'Iyah, 
in  a  debate  with  a  member  of  the  sect  he  said  the  f  ollowin°- : 
"  You  are  of  less  account  in  my  eyes  than  the  Mamturah 
dogs  [dogs  rained  upon]." 

47       e.  Concerning  the  Mubarakiyah. 

They  desired  the  Imamate  to  go  to  the  son  of  Muham- 
mad ibn-Isma/il  ibn-Ja'far  x  as  the  Batiniyah  claim;  but  the 
genealogists  say  in  their  books  that  Muhammad  ibn-Isma'il 
ibn-Ja'far  died  and  left  no  offspring. 

f.  Concerning  the  branch  called  the  al-KatiTyah  from 
among  them. 

These  transferred  the  Imamate  from  Ja'far  al-Sadik  to 
his  son  Musa,  and  believe  in  the  cTeath  of  Musa,  and  claim 
that  the  Imam  who  succeeded  him  was  the  grandson  of 
Muhammad  ibn-al-Hasan,  who  was  a  grandson  of  'All  ibn- 
Musa  al-Rida.  They  were  also  called  Twelvers,2  because 
of  their  assertion  that  this  expected  Mahdi  would  be  the 
twelfth  in  line  from  'AH  ibn-abl-Talib.  And  they  differed 
over  the  age  of  this  twelfth  Imam  at  the  death  of  his  father. 
Some  said  that  he  was  four  years  old,  and  some  that  he 
was  eight  years  old.  They  also  differed  over  his  right  to 
rule  at  that  time;  some  claiming  that  even  then  he  was 
really  Imam,  knowing  all  that  an  Imam  should  know,  obe- 
dience to  him  being  obligatory;  while  others  claimed  that 
although  under  age,  he  was  theoretically  Imam,  for  no 
other  could  be  Imam,  decisions  meanwhile  being  in  the 
hands  of  the  learned  men  of  the  school  until  his  coming  of 

1  Friedlander,  J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxviii,  pp.  58-69.     The  Seveners  be- 
lieved him  to  be  the  last  Imam. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  171,  cf.  Ithna'ashariyah. 

66 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

age,  at  which  time  this  Imamate  was  definitely  recognized  - 
and  to  whom  obedience  was  due ;  and  that  he  is  now  the 
Imam  to  whom  obedience  is  due,  although  he  is  absent.1 

g.  Concerning  those  called  the  Hishamiyah  among  them.2 
Of  these  two  sects,  one  owes  its  origin  to  Hisham  ibn-al- 
Hakam  al-Rafid 3  and  the  other  to  Hisham  ibn-Salim 4  al- 
Jawaliki.  To  their  true  doctrines  in  regard  to  the  Imamate  48 
these  two  sects  added  the  error  of  predicating  a  body  to 
Allah,  as  well  as  their  heresy  as  regards  anthropomorphisms. 
Concerning  the  views  of  Hisham  ibn-al-Hakam :  Hisham 
ibn-al-Hakam  claimed  that  that  which  he  worshipped  was  a 
body  possessing  dimensions,  height,  breadth  and  thickness, 
its  height  being  equal  to  its  breadth  and  to  its  depth,  while 
its  length  and  breadth  are  specified  only  as  long  and  broad. 
He  held,  moreover,  that  its  extension  upward  is  no  greater 
than  its  breadth.  In  addition,  he  claimed  that  the  object 
that  he  worshipped  was  a  diffusing  light,  shining  as  a  pure 
chain  of  silver,  and  as  a  pearl  perfectly  rounded.  This 
object  also  possessed,  according  to  him,  color,  taste,  smell, 
touch.5  He  also  claims  that  its  color  is  its  taste,  its  taste 
its  smell,  its  smell  its  touch.  He  does  not  say  that  color 
and  taste  are  its  essence,  but  he  claims  that  the  object 
itself  is  color  and  taste.  He  went  on  to  say  that  Allah  was, 
when  space  was  not,  and  it  was  by  his  own  motion  that  he 
created  space,  space  thus  appearing  for  the  first  time,  and  it 
is  in  this  space  that  Allah  is,  and  this  space  is  his  throne. 

1  Ibid.,  vol.  xxviii,  p.  53. 

2  Not  to  be  confused  with  the  Hishamiyah  of  the  Mu'tazilites. 
3Ibid.,  vol.  xxvii,  p.  65.     ShahrastanI,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  212.     Mas'udi, 

ibid.,  vol.  v,  pp.  443  et  seq.,  vol.  vi,  pp.  370  et  seq.,  vol.  vii,  p.  232  et  seq. 

4  Ai-Fihrist,  p.  17/. 

5  Cf.  M.  Horten,  Philosophischen  Systeme  der  spekulativcn  Thcologen 
im  Islam,  p.  170.    ^ShahrastanI,  ibid.,  vol.  i.  p.  87. 

67 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Some  report  of  Hisham  that  he  described  the  object  which 
he  worshipped  as  seven  spans  [measured]  by  his  own  span, 
as  if  he  had  measured  him  according  to  human  measure- 
ment, since  in  the  majority  of  cases  man  is  seven  spans  by 
his  own  span. 

Abu-al-Hudhail  in  one  of  his  books  says  that  he  met 
Hisham  ibn-al-Hakam  in  Mecca  near  the  mount  of  abu- 
Kubais  '  and  asked  him  which  of  the  two  was  greater,  the 
being  he  worshipped  or  this  mountain.  He  answered, 
pointing  to  it :  "  The  mountain  towers  above  him,  the  ex- 
alted, i.  e.  verily  the  mountain  is  greater  than  he."  2 
aq  Ibn-al-Rawandi  relates  in  one  of  his  books  about  Hisham 
that  he  said :  "  There  is  a  likeness  between  Allah  and  bodies 
that  can  be  felt  in  some  way;  if  this  were  not  so,  they  would 
not  point  to  Him." 

Al-Jahiz,  in  one  of  his  books,  says  about  Hisham :  that  he 
said  that  Allah  knows  what  is  under  the  earth  only  by  means 
of  the  rays  that  come  from  him  and  penetrate  to  the  depths 
of  the  earth.  And  they  said,  unless  his  rays  touched  what 
was  behind  the  moving  bodies,  he  would  not  have  seen  what 
is  behind  it,  nor  would  he  have  known  about  it.  Abu-'Isa 
al-Warrak  said  in  his  book  that  some  of  Hisham's  compan- 
ions answered  him  that  Allah  touches  his  throne,  but  is  not 
separate  from  it;  nor  is  the  throne  separate  from  him.  It 
is  also  reported  that  Hisham,  in  addition  to  his  error  con- 
cerning the  Tauhid  [unity],  erred  concerning  the  attributes 
of  Allah.  He  changed  the  opinion  that  Allah  does  not  cease 
knowing  things,  claiming  that  he  knows  things  after  not 
having  known  them,  through  knowledge,  and  that  knowl- 
edge is  one  of  his  attributes,  not  identical  with  him,  nor  is 
it  anything  other  than  he,  nor  is  it  a  part  of  him.    He  said, 

1  The  highest  in  the  range  around  Mecca.  De  Goeje,  Bibliotheca 
Geographorum  Arabicorum,  vol.  vii,  p.  314. 

2  Friedlander,  ibid.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  27. 

68 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

moreover,  that  his  knowledge  cannot  be  said  to  be  eternal, 
nor  created,  for  it  is  an  attribute,  and  according  to  him  an 
attribute  cannot  be  predicated.    About  the  power  of  Allah, 
and  his  hearing,  and  his  seeing,  and  his  life,  and  his  will, 
he  said,  verily  they  are  not  eternal  nor  created,  because  an 
attribute  cannot  be  predicated.     And  he  said  in  regard  to 
them  that  they  are  he  and  no  other.    He  also  said  that  Allah, 
had  he  never  ceased  knowing  things  that  are  knowable,  the 
latter  would  be  eternal,  because  one  cannot  be  a  knower 
without  an  object  already  existing  to  be  known,  as  if  Hisham 
had  impugned  the  possibility  of  knowing  the  non-existent. 
Hisham  said,  moreover,  that  if  Allah  was  the  knower  of    50 
that  which  his   servants   did   for  him  before  their   deeds 
actually  occurred,  the  free  will  of  his  servants  would  not  be 
possible,  nor  could  they  impose  duties  upon  themselves.     In 
regard  to  the  Koran,  he  was  wont  to  say  that  it  was  neither 
creator  nor  created.    It  could,  nevertheless,  not  be  said  that 
it  'was  not  created,  because  such  a  statement  would  be  an 
attribute   and,   according  to  him,   an  attribute  cannot  be 
predicated.     As  to  the  deeds  of  Allah's  servants,  the  tradi- 
tions about  them,  according  to  him,  are  divergent.     One 
tradition  says  they  were  created  of  Allah,  another  that  they 
are  ideas,  and  neither  things  nor  bodies,  for  according  to 
Hisham  a  thing  can  only  be  a  body.    Regarding  the  proph- 
ets, Hisham  considered  it  lawful  to  say  that  they  were  dis- 
obedient, although  the  Imams  he  considered  sinless.     In 
connection  with  this  he  claimed  that  the  prophet  disobeyed 
his  Lord  in  taking  ransom  from  the  prisoners  of  Badr,  but 
Allah  forgave  him.    Applied  to  this  are  the  words  of  Allah : 
"  May  Allah  forgive  thee  that  which  thou  hast  done  early 
by  thy  fault  and  that  in  which  thou  didst  delay."  *     Thus 
he  distinguished  between  prophet  and  Imam,  since  to  the 

1  Surah  48,  v.  2. 

69 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Prophet  when  he  disobeyed  there  came  a  revelation  calling 
attention  to  his  sins,  while  to  the  Imam  no  such  revelation 
came;  he  must  therefore  be  free  from  disobedience.  As 
regards  the  Imamate,  Hisham  belonged  to  the  school  of  the 
Imamlyah,  although  the  rest  of  the  Imamlyah  condemned 
him  because  he  thought  the  Prophet  capable  of  disobedience. 
Furthermore,  he  denied  that  any  of  the  parts  of  a  body 
were  limited,  and  it  was  from  him  that  al-Nazzam  1  took  the 
doctrine  that  what  could  be  no  further  divided  was  non- 
existent. Zurkan  2  says  of  him  in  his  treatise  that  he  held 
51  that  it  was  possible  for  one  body  to  pass  into  another,  just 
as  al-Nazzam  held  that  two  thin  bodies  could  be  in  the  same 
place  [at  the  same  time].  Zurkan  reports  further  that  he 
said  :  "  Man  consists  of  two  things,  a  body  and  a  soul.  The 
body  is  dead,  the  soul,  however,  is  sentient  and  intelligent, 
and  acts  on  the  outside  world.  It  is  a  light  like  the  bodies 
in  the  universe  that  give  light."  As  regards  earthquake, 
Hisham  said :  "  The  earth  is  made  up  of  different  elements 
each  closely  attached  to  the  other.  Thus  when  one  of  these 
elements  becomes  weak  the  other  becomes  stronger,  and  an 
earthquake  takes  place;  if  the  element  further  increases  in 
weakness,  there  is  an  eclipse.''  Zurkan  also  reported  of 
him  that  he  considered  it  possible  for  someone  who  was  not 
a  prophet  to  walk  on  water,  although  he  did  say  that  mir- 
acles could  not  be  performed  by  one  who  was  not  a  prophet. 
Concerning  Hisham  ibn-Salim  al-Jawaliki:  This  Jawa- 
liki  while  belonging  in  his  heresies  to  the  school  of  the 
Imamlyah  went  to  the  extreme  as  regards  the  doctrine  of 
corporeality  and  anthropomorphism.  He  claimed  that  the 
object  which  he  worshipped  was  in  the  image  of  man,  but 
was  not  flesh  and  blood,  being  a  diffused  white  light.  He 
claimed  also  that  he  possesses  five  senses,  like  the  senses  of 

1  Friedlander,  ibid.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  58. 

2  According  to  punctuation  in  Dhahabi,  al  Mushtabih,  p.  240. 

70 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

man,  and  has  hands  and  feet  and  eyes  and  ears  and  nose 
and  mouth,  and  he  hears  by  a  different  means  from  that  by 
which  he  sees,  and  the  rest  of  the  senses  being  different  in 
the  same  way.  He  goes  on  to  say  that  the  upper  half  of 
this  being  is  hollow  and  the  lower  is  solid. 

Abu-'Isa  al-Warrak  *  reports  that  he  claims  that  his  ob- 
ject of  worship  had  black  hair,  it  being  a  black  light,  but  the 
rest  of  the  person  is  white  light. 

Our  Sheikh  abu'l-Hasan  al-'Ash'ari  reports  in  his  treat- 
ise that  Hisham  ibn-Salim  held  the  same  views  as  Hisham 
ibn-al-Hakam  as  regards  the  will  of  Allah.  They  maintain  52 
that  his  will  is  an  act,  a  mental  image  which  is  not  Allah 
nor  anyone  besides  him.  Thus  if  Allah  wishes  anything, 
he  moves,  and  that  which  he  wishes  is.  In  this  abu-Malik 
al-Hadraml  agrees,  as  well  as  'All  ibn-Maitham,  who  were 
of  the  sheikhs  of  the  Randiyah,  i.  e.,  that  the  will  of  Allah 
is  a  separate  act;  but  they  hold  further  that  the  will  of 
Allah  is  outside  of  him. 

It  is  also  said  of  al-Jawaliki  that  he  said  that  the  acts  of 
the  servants  of  Allah  are  substances,  for  there  is  nothing  in 
the  world  but  substances.  He  thus  granted  that  the  servants 
of  Allah  could  create  substances.  A  similar  view  is  re- 
ported of  Shaitan  al-Tak. 

h.  Concerning  the  Zarariyah  2  from  among  them. 

These  are  the  followers  of  'AH  Zararah  ibn-A'yan,  who 
belonged  to  the  sect  al-Kahdiyah,  those  who  believed  in  the 
Imamate  of  'Abdallah  ibn-Ja'far.  From  this  sect  he  went 
over  to  that  of  the  Musawiyah.  The  heresy  which  is  laid  at 
his  door  is  that  Allah  did  not  live,  nor  have  power,  nor  hear, 
nor  see,  nor  know,  nor  wish,  until  he  created  for  himself  life, 
and  power,  and  knowledge,  and  will,  and  hearing,  and  see- 


1  Mentioned  in  Fihrist,  p.  33%- 

2  Not  included  by  Ibn-Hazm. 


7i 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

ing.  It  was  after  he  had  created  these  attributes  for  him- 
self that  he  became  living,  powerful,  wise,  wishing,  hearing, 
and  seeing.  The  Basrah  Kadariyah  inferred  frcm  this  form 
of  heresy  the  finiteness  of  Allah's  will  and  of  Allah's  word. 
It  was  from  this  principle  that  the  Karamiyah  inferred  their 
doctrine  that  the  word  of  Allah  and  his  will  and  his  apper- 
ceptions were  finite. 

i.  Concerning  the  Yunuslyah  *  from  among  them. 

They  are  the  followers  of  Yunus  ibn-'Abd-al-Rahman  al- 
Kummi.2  AJthough  of  the  Imamiyah,  he  belonged  to  the 
53  school  of  the  Katfiyah,  who  firmly  maintained  that  Musa 
ibn-Ja'far  had  died.  And  it  was  he  who  gave  to  those  who 
would  not  commit  themselves  to  a  decision  on  the  death  of 
Musa  the  name  of  Mamturah  dogs.  Yunus,  however,  ex- 
ceeded the  limits  of  anthropomorphism.  He  claimed  that 
Allah  is  borne  by  the  bearers  of  his  throne,  though  he  is 
stronger  than  they;  just  as  the  legs  of  the  throne  bear  the 
throne,  although  the  throne  is  stronger  than  they.  As  a 
proof  of  the  fact  that  Allah  is  borne,  he  quoted :  "  And  on 
that  day  eight  will  bear  the  throne  of  your  lord  above 
them."  3  Whereas  the  people  of  our  doctrine  maintain  that 
this  verse  proves  that  the  throne  is  borne,  and  not  the  lord. 

j.  Concerning  the  Shaitamyah  from  among  them. 

These  are  the  followers  of  Muhammad  ibn-al-Nu'man  al- 
Rafidi,  called  Shaitan  al-Tak  4  up  to  his  son  Musa.  This 
sect  maintains  that  Musa  died,  and  they  look  for  a  successor 

1  Not  to  be  confused  with  the  Yunuslyah  of  the  Murji'ah.  Not  a  sect 
in  Ibn-Hazm,  J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  50. 

2  Fihrist,  p.  220. 

3  Surah  69,  v.  17. 

4  Ibn-Hazm  calls  him  the  son  of  Ja'far,  J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  59; 
ShahrastanI  calls  the  sect  Nu'manlyah  (cf.  Z.  D.  M.  G.,  61,  75,  n.  2). 
Mentioned  in  Fihrist,  p.  308,  also  as  abu-Ja'far. 

72 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  RAWAFID 

for  him  and  agree  with  Hisham  ibn-Salim  al-Jawaliki  in  the 
view  that  the  deeds  of  the  servants  of  Allah  are  substances; 
and  that  a  servant  of  Allah  can  really  produce  a  substance. 
They  also  agree  with  Hisham  ibn-al-Hakam  in  the  claim 
that  Allah  knows  all  things  only  after  having  determined 
them,  and  willed  them,  and  that  he  does  not  know  the  things 
before  determining  them. 

'Abd  al-Kahir  says  that  we  have  mentioned  the  sects  of 
the  Rafidah  among  the  Zaidiyah  and  the  Kaisamyah  and 
the  Imamiyah.  Today  the  Kaisamyah  are  undistinguish- 
able,  having  mingled  with  the  Zaidiyah  and  the  Imamiyah 
among  the  Zaidiyah.  When  quarrels  arose  among  the 
Imamiyah,  some  causing  the  others  to  err,  one  of  the  Imam- 
iyah poets  satirized  the  Zaidiyah  as  follows : 

"  O  ye  useless  Zaidiyah,  your  Imam  is  an  unfortunate  one,  and  cast  off.     -^ 

0  ye  vultures  of  the  air,1  go  to  Hell,  ye  have  dived  down  and  brought 

up  stones  against  us." 

A  poet  of  the  Zaidiyah  answered  him  as  follows : 

"  Our  Imam  is  set  up  and  stands  upright,  not  like  the  one  who  has  to 
be  sought  by  sifting. 
Any   Imam  who  is  not  seen   publicly,   he  is   not  worth  unto   us   a 
mustard  seed." 

'Abd  al-Kahir  says  we  have  answered  these  two  sects  as 
regards  their  verses  as  follows : 

"  O,  ye  worthless  Rafidah,  your  claims  are  worthless  throughout. 
Your  Imam — if  he  is  hidden  in  darkness,  try  to  reach  the  hidden  one 

by  means  of  a  light 
Or  if  he  is  covered  up  by  your  rancors,  then  bring  forth  by  means 

of  a  sieve  the  one  who  is  covered  up. 
But  the  true  Imam,  according  to  us,  is  revealed  by  the  Sunn<ih  or 

Koran  verse. 
And  in  them  is  a  sufficiency  for  him  who  is  rightly  led.     These  two 

suffice  us  as  a  revelation." 

1  The  bird  is  used  for  hurtful  companions.     Goldziher,  Z.  D.  M.  G., 
lxv,  353- 

73 


CHAPTER  II 
The  Sects  of  the  Kharijiyah 

As  we  have  mentioned  before,  the  Khawarij  form  twenty 
sects,1  and  the  following  are  their  names :  The  First 
Muhakkimah,  the  Azarikah,  the  Najadat,  the  Sifriyah,2  the 
'Ajaridah  (who  are  themselves  divided  into  sects,  one  of 
which  is  the  Khazimiyah),  the  Shu'aibiyah,  the  Ma'lumiyah, 
55  the  Majhuliyah,  the  Ashab  Ta'ah  (those  who  do  pious 
deeds  with  no  intention  to  please  God),  the  Saltiyah,  the 
Akhnasiyah,  the  Shaibiyah,  the  Shaibaniyah,  the  Mu'bad- 
iyah,  the  Rashidiyah,  the  Makrumiyah,  the  Khamriyah,  the 
Shamrakhiyah,  the  Ibrahimiyah,  the  Wakifah,  and  the 
Ibadiyah.8  The  Ibadiyah  are  divided  into  various  sects,  the 
majority  forming  the  two  main  sects  of  the  Hafsiyah  and 
the  Hadithiyah.    As  regards  the  Yazidlyah  4  of  the  Ibadiyah 

1  According  to  ShahrastanI,  the  Khawarij  are  divided  into  six  sects. 
Cf.  Haarbriicker's  translation,  vol.  i,  p.  129. 

2  There  seems  to  be  some  doubt  about  the  pointing  of  this  word. 
ShahrastanI  does  not  point  it  at  all.  Haarbriicker  transcribes  it  as 
Sifriyah.  Friedlander  (J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix)  gives  it  as  Sufrlyah, 
while  Muhammad  Badr  has  in  one  place  Sifriyah  and  in  the  other 
Sufrlyah.  We  are  inclined  to  think  the  latter  correct,  since  it  occurs 
oftener. 

3  Wellhausen:  Religids-politischen  Oppositionsparteien  itn  Alten  Islam, 
Abhandlungen  der  Gesellschaft  der  Wissenschaften  Gottingen,  vol.  v, 
p.  28. 

*  ShahrastanI  includes  the  Yazidlyah  among  the  orthodox  sects.  Cf. 
Haarbriicker's  translation,  vol.  i,  p.  153. 

74 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

and  the  Maimuniyah  1  of  the  'Ajaridah,  these  were  two 
sects  of  the  unorthodox  Ghulat  who  are  not  included  in  the 
sects  of  the  Moslem  people.  They  will  be  mentioned  in  a 
later  chapter  in  connection  with  the  sects  of  the  Ghulat, 
please  God. 

As  to  the  main  beliefs  on  which  the  Khawarij  unite,  in 
spite  of  the  divisions  of  their  various  sects,  scholars  disagree. 
Al-Ka'bi  says  that  in  spite  of  their  division  into  sects  the 
Khawarij  agreed  on  the  following  views,  namely:  in  con- 
demning 'AH  and  'Uthman,  the  two  judges  (Arabic  al-haka- 
main),  and  all  the  Followers  of  the  Camel,  and  all  who 
accepted  the  decision  of  the  two  judges;  in  declaring  as 
apostates  those  who  commit  major  sins;  and  in  the  neces- 
sity of  rebelling  against  an  oppressive  Imam.     Our  sheikh 
abu-1-Hasan,   on  the  other  hand,  said  that  they  agree  in 
condemning  'All  and  'Uthman,  the  Followers  of  the  Camel, 
and  the  two  judges,  those  who  accepted  their  decision  claim- 
ing the  decision  of  one  or  both  as  right.     He  also  claimed 
that  they  agreed  over  the  necessity  of  rebelling  against  an 
oppressive  ruler;  but  he  does  not  hold  al-Ka'bfs  view  that 
they  agreed  in  condemning  those  who  commit  major  sins. 
The  correct  view  is  that  given  concerning  them  by  our 
sheikh  abu-1-Hasan;  for  al-Ka'bi  is  wrong  in  his  views  that 
the  Khawarij  agreed  in  condemning  those  who  committed 
major  sins.     The  Najadat  especially,  among  the  Khawarij, 
do  not  declare  as  heretics  those  of  their  followers  who  have 
made  themselves  liable  to  punishments   (Arabic,  ashab  al- 
hudiid):-     Some  of  the  Khawarij  hold  that  a  man  can  be 
declared  unorthodox  only  when  committing  sins  in  regard    56 
to  which  there  is  no  express  threat  (in  the  Koran)  ;  while 
as  regards  the  sin   for  which  there  is  either  punishment 

1  Included  among  the  orthodox  sects  by  Shahrastani. 
3  Juynboll :  Handbuch  des  Isldmischen  Gesetzes,  p.  yx>. 

75 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

or  threat  given  in  the  Koran,  the  person  committing  such 
a  sin  cannot  be  designated  only  by  an  appellation  men- 
tioned in  the  Koran,  such  as  adulterer,  thief,  and  the  like. 
The  Najadat,  on  the  contrary,  hold  that  the  one  of  their 
number  who  commits  a  major  sin  is  excluded  from  Allah's 
grace,  but  is  not  necessarily  a  heretic  in  faith.  This  shows 
al-Ka'bfs  error  in  saying  that  all  of  the  Khawarij  agree  in 
declaring  the  authors  of  major  sins  heretics,  whether  they 
belong  to  the  Kharijite  body  or  another.  The  only  correct 
view  in  regard  to  the  beliefs  held  in  common  by  all  the 
Khawarij  is  that  which  our  sheikh  abu-1-Hasan  claims, 
namely :  the  condemning  of  'AH  and  'Uthman,  the  Follow- 
ers of  the  Camel,  the  two  judges,  and  all  those  who  justified 
the  decision  of  the  two  judges,  or  the  decision  of  one  of 
them,  or  accepted  their  arbitration.  We  will  now  take  up 
all  these  divisions  in  detail,  please  God. 

i.  Concerning  the  first  Muhakkimah:  The  Khawarij 
were  either  Muhakkimah  or  Shurah.1  Scholars  differ  in 
regard  to  the  first  person  who  became  a  Shurah.  Some  say 
it  was  'Urwah  ibn-Hudair,2  the  brother  of  Maradis  al-Kha- 
riji;  and  others  that  the  first  to  secede  was  Yazid  ibn-'Asim 
al-Muhadhi ;  3  while  others  hold  that  a  man  of  the  Rabi'ah 
of  the  Banu  Yashkur  who  was  with  'All  at  Siffin,  when  he 
saw  that  the  two  parties  had  agreed  upon  the  tzvo  judges. 
mounted  his  horse  and  attacked  the  followers  of  Mu'awiyah, 
killing  one  of  their  men,  following  this  with  an  attack  on 
the  followers  of  'All,  killing  one  of  their  men.  He  then 
cried  at  the  top  of  his  voice :  "  Verily  have  I  given  up  alle- 
giance to  'All  and  Mu'awiyah,  and  am  therefore  not  bound 

1  Mentioned  in  ShahrastanI,  Haarbriicker,  vol.  i,  p.  21,  i.  e.  heretics. 
On  the  term,  see  Lane,  S.  V.  and  Z.  D.  M.  G.,  Ixi,  p.  432. 

2  Tabarl,  Chronique  ed.  Zotenberg,  vol.  iii,  p.  683. 

3  ShahrastanI,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  130,  calls  him  Yazid  ibn  'Asim  al- 
Muharibl. 

75 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

by  their  decision."  It  was  while  fighting  the  followers  of 
'All  that  he  was  killed  by  some  men  from  Hamadhan.  As 
for  the  Khawarij,  who  then  numbered  twelve  thousand, 
after  the  return  of  'All  from  Siffin  to  al-Kfifah,  they  broke  57 
up  camp  and  went  to  Hartira.  This  is  why  the  Khawarij 
are  called  Haruriyah.  Their  leaders  at  the  time  were  'Ab- 
dallah  ibn-Kauwa  and  Shibt  ibn-Rab'i.  'AH  came  against 
them  and  plead  with  them,  and  his  arguments  prevailed  so 
that  ibn-al-Kauwa  put  himself  under  'All's  protection  with 
ten  horsemen  while  the  rest  of  them  went  to  al-Nahrawan, 
and  made  two  men  commanders  over  them :  'Abdallah  ibn- 
Wahab  al-Rasibi,1  and  Hurkus  ibn-Zuhair  al-Bajali  al- 
'Urani  known  as  dhu-1-Thudaiah.2  On  their  way  through 
Nahrawan  they  discovered  a  man  who  was  fleeing  from 
them  and  having  surrounded  him,  they  said,  "  Who  art 
thou?"  He  answered,  "  I  am  'Abdallah  ibn-Hubab  ibn-al- 
'Aratt."  3  "  Tell  us,"  said  they,  "  a  tradition  which  thou 
didst  hear  from  thy  father  and  which  he  heard  from  the 
prophet  of  Allah."  He  said,  "  I  have  heard  my  father  say 
that  the  prophet  of  Allah  said,  '  There  will  be  a  civil  war 
during  which  he  who  sits  will  be  better  than  he  who  stands, 
and  he  who  stands  than  he  who  walks,  and  he  who  walks 
better  than  he  who  runs,  and  whoever  is  able  to  be  killed, 
let  him  not  be  a  slayer.'  "  Then  a  man  of  the  Khawarij, 
called  Masma'  ibn-Kadali,  fell  upon  him  with  his  sword 
and  killed  him,  and  his  blood  flowed  in  a  streak  over  the 
water  of  the  river  to  the  other  side.  They  then  entered  his 
house  which  was  in  the  village,  before  the  gate  of  which 

1  Wellhausen,  ibid.,  p.  17  ct  seq.    Shahrastani,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  130. 

2  Ibid.,  p.   130.     For   further   account  see   Tabarl-Zotenberg,   vol.   iii, 
p.  683. 

3  Wellhausen:  Das  Arabischc  Reich  und  sein  Sturs,  p.  54-     Briinnow  : 
Die  Charidschiten,  p.  20. 

77 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

they  had  killed  him,  and  put  his  child  to  death,  as  well  as 
his  slave  (concubine),  the  mother  of  his  child.  They  then 
encamped  in  Nahrawan.  When  news  of  them  reached  'All 
he  started  against  them  with  forty  thousand  of  his  follow- 
58  ers,  accompanied  by  'Adi  ibn-Hatim  al-Ta'I,1  who  said: 

"  When  people  fall  back  and  slink  away,  we  come  with  banners  of  truth 

fluttering  like  eagles, 
Against  the  worst  of  Schismatics,  who  have  gathered  together  to  make 

war  on  the  God  of  men,  the  Lord  of  the  East, 
Against  the  erring  and  the  blind  and  the  forsakers  of  true  guidance, 

all  of  whom  reject  his  word,  and  are  unrighteous. 
And  among  us  is  'All,  of  excellent  virtue,  who  leads  us  against  them 

openly  with  shining  swords." 

On  arriving,  'All  sent  word  to  them  saying,  "  Hand  over 
the  slayer  of  'Abdallah  ibn-Hubbab."  The  answer  came 
back,  "  Lo,  all  of  us  killed  him,  and  verily  if  we  had  won 
the  victory  over  thee,  we  should  have  killed  thee."  Where- 
upon 'AH  attacked  them  with  his  army,  and  they  appeared 
before  him  en  masse.  But  before  fighting  he  said  to  them, 
"What  makes  you  seek  revenge  from  me?"  They  an- 
swered, "  We  seek  revenge  from  thee,  first  of  all,  because 
we  fought  for  thee  in  the  Battle  of  the  Camel,  and  when  the 
Followers  of  the  Camel  were  put  to  flight  thou  didst  permit 
us  [to  keep]  what  we  had  won  [in  the  way]  of  booty  from 
their  soldiers,  but  thou  didst  forbid  our  taking  possession 
of  their  women  and  their  children.  Why  didst  thou  permit 
us  their  goods  and  exclude  their  women  and  children  ?"  'AH 
answered :  "  I  allowed  their  possessions  to  be  seized  only  in 
exchange  for  what  they  had  robbed  from  the  treasury  in 
al-Basrah  before  I  came  to  them.  But  as  to  the  women  and 
the  children,  they  were  not  fighting  us.  And  therefore  the 
regulations  of  Islam,  made  within  the  territory  of  Islam,2 

lrraban,  ibid.,  vol.  iii,  p.  171  et  seq.,  245,  326,  342,  653  et  seq.,  658,  675. 
2  Dar  al-Islam. 

78 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

should  be  applied  to  them.  None  of  them  had  apostatized 
from  Islam,  and  it  is  not  permitted  to  make  slaves  of  those 
who  are  not  unbelievers.  Moreover,  if  I  had  allowed  you 
to  take  the  women,  which  one  of  you  would  have  taken 
'A'ishah  as  his  share?"  The  people  being  shamefully 
silenced  by  this,  said  to  him,  "  Secondly,  we  seek  revenge 
from  thee  for  not  using  the  Commander  of  the  Faithful  in 
connection  with  thy  name,  in  the  correspondence  between 
thee  and  Mu'awiyah,  when  the  latter  disputed  with  thee  in  59 
regard  to  such  power."  He  answered,  "  I  followed  the  ex- 
ample of  the  prophet  of  Allah  on  the  day  of  al-Hudaibiyah, 
when  Suhail  ibn-'Amr  said  to  him,  '  Had  I  known  that  thou 
art  the  prophet  of  Allah,  I  would  not  have  disputed  with 
thee,  but  write  down  thy  name  and  the  name  of  thy 
father !'  l  Accordingly  the  Prophet  wrote,  '  It  is  this  upon 
which  we,  Muhammad  ibn-'Abdallah  and  Suhail  ibn-'Amr, 
have  agreed.'  The  prophet  of  Allah  told  me  that  the  same 
would  happen  to  me,  in  connection  with  them;  so  my  ex- 
perience with  the  sons  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  prophet  of 
Allah  with  the  fathers."  They  then  went  on  to  say  to  'All, 
"  Why  didst  thou  say  to  the  two  judges,  '  If  I  am  worthy 
of  the  caliphate,  then  confirm  me  in  it?'  for  if  thou  showest 
doubt  concerning  thy  caliphate,  then  others  (than  thou) 
will  have  even  more  right  to  be  in  doubt  concerning  thee." 
To  this  'Ali  replied :  "  On  that  occasion  I  desired  only  jus- 
tice to  Mu'awiyah,  for  if  I  had  said  to  the  too  judges, 
'Choose  me  for  caliph,'  Mu'awiyah  would  not  have  been 
satisfied.  Verily  the  prophet  of  Allah  challenged  the  Chris- 
tians of  Najran  to  invoke  the  curse  of  God  on  the  lying 
faction,  saying,  "  Come,  let  us  summon  our  sons  and  your 
sons,  our  wives  and  your  wives,  and  ourselves  and  your- 
selves.    Then  we  will  invoke  and  lay  the  malison  of  Allah 

1  Tabarl,  ibid.,  vol.  iii,  p.  89. 

79 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

on  those  who  lie.'  (Surah  3,  v.  54.)  In  doing  this  he 
showed  justice  to  them  even  at  his  own  expense,  for  if  he 
had  said,  '  I  curse  and  ask  the  curse  of  Allah  upon  you,'  the 
Christians  would  not  have  been  satisfied.  It  is  for  this 
reason  that  I,  in  turn,  was  just  with  Mu'awiyah.  Nor  do  I 
understand  the  treachery  of  'Amr  ibn-al-'Asi."  They  then 
said,  "  Why  didst  thou  entrust  the  arbitration  to  the  two 
judges  when  the  right  was  on  thy  side?"  And  he  said,  "  I 
found  that  the  Prophet  of  Allah  had  once  entrusted  to  Sa'd 
ibn-Mu'adh  the  arbitration  of  the  case  of  the  banu- 
Kuraizah,1  although  had  he  wished  he  need  not  have  done 
it.  In  like  manner  I  chose  a  judge,  but  the  judge  of  the 
60  Prophet  judged  justly,  whereas  my  judge  was  cheated — 
which  led  to  evil  results.  Have  you  any  complaints  beside 
this?"  The  people  were  silent.  Most  of  them  said,  "By 
Allah,  he  speaketh  the  truth."  And  they  said,  "  We  re- 
pent." So  on  that  day  eight  thousand  put  themselves  under 
his  control  while  four  thousand  withdrew  to  take  part  in 
the  fight  against  him  headed  by  'Abdallah  ibn-Wahb  al- 
Rasibi  and  Hurkus  ibn-Zuhair  al-Bajali.  Then  'AH  said  to 
those  who  had  put  themselves  under  his  control,  "  With- 
draw from  me  for  this  one  day."  And  he  fought  the 
Khawarij  with  those  who  had  come  with  him  from  al- 
Kufah.  He  commanded  his  followers  to  fight  them,  say- 
ing, "  By  him  in  whose  hand  is  my  soul  not  ten  of  us  will 
be  killed,  and  not  ten  of  them  will  escape."  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  nine  of  the  followers  of  'AH  were  killed  on  that  day. 
These  were  Duwaibiyah  ibn-Wabrah  al-Bajali,  Sa'd  ibn- 
Mujalid  al-Saiba'I,  'Abdallah  ibn-Hammad  al-Juhairi, 
Rukanah  ibn-Wa'il  al-Arji,  al-Faiyad  ibn-Khalll  al-Azdi, 
Kaisum  ibn-Salamah  al-Juhani,  'Utbah  ibn-'Ubaid  al- 
Khaulani,    Jami'    ibn-Jusham    al-Kindi,    and    Habib    ibn- 

1  Ibn-Hisham,  p.  674.     Tabarl,  ibid.,  vol.  iii,  p.  70. 

80 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

'Aslni  al-'Audi.  These  nine  were  killed  under  the  flag  of 
'All — and  no  more.  In  the  course  of  the  conflict,  Hurkus 
ibn-Zuhair  presented  himself  before  'All  and  said,  "Oson  of 
abu-Talib,  by  Allah,  we  do  not  wish  to  fight  with  thee  except 
for  the  sake  of  Allah  and  the  other  world."  And  'All  said 
to  him,  "  Verily  to  you  applies  the  word  of  Allah,  '  Shall 
we  tell  you  who  they  are  that  have  lost  their  labor  most; 
whose  aim  in  the  present  life  hath  been  mistaken,  and  who 
deem  that  what  they  do  is  right?'  (Surah  18,  v.  103-104.) 
By  the  Lord  of  the  Ka'hah,  you  are  among  those  referred 
to  in  the  text."  'All  then  attacked  them  with  his  followers, 
and  'Abdallah  ibn-Wahb  was  killed  in  a  duel,  and  Dhu-1-  61 
Thudyah  was  thrown  from  his  horse.  Most  of  the 
Khawarij  were  killed  that  day,  only  nine  of  them  escaping. 
Two  of  these  went  to  Sijistan  where  the  present  Khawarij 
are  their  followers.  And  two  went  to  al-Yaman.  The 
Ibadiyah  of  al-Yaman  are  their  followers.  Two  went  to 
'Uman  and  founded  the  sect  of  Khawarij  there.  Two  went 
to  the  region  of  al-Jazirah  (Mesopotamia),  and  the  Kha- 
warij of  al-Jazirah  are  their  followers.  And  one  went  to 
Tell  Mauzan.1  On  that  day  'All  said  to  his  followers, 
"  Seek  Dhu-1-Thudyah."  They  found  him  under  a  vine- 
tree,  and  they  saw  under  his  arm,  near  the  armpit,  some- 
thing like  the  breast  of  a  woman.  Whereupon  'AH  said, 
"The  word  of  Allah  and  his  Prophet  have  come  true;" 
and  in  accordance  with  'All's  desire  he  was  put  to  death. 
This  is  the  story  of  the  First  Muhakkimah.  Then  the  First 
Muhakkimah  declared  as  unorthodox  'AH  and  'Uthman,  the 
Followers  of  the  Camel,  Mu'awiyah  and  his  followers,  the 
two  judges,  and  whoever  agrees  with  their  decision ;  as  well 
as  all  sinful  and  disobedient  men. 

Shortly  after   this,    there   rebelled   against   'AH   certain 

1  De  Goeje,  La  fin  de  V empire  des  Carmathes  du  Bahrein,  Journ.  As. 
1895,  ser.  ix,  vol.  v,  pp.  n,  171. 

81 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Khawarij  who  were  of  the  same  view  as  the  First  Muhak- 
kimah.  Among  them  was  'Ashras  ibn-'Auf,  who  arose 
against  him  in  al-Anbar,  Ghalafah  al-Taimi,  of  Taim  'Adi, 
arose  against  him  in  Masidhan ;  1  al-Ashhab  ibn-Bishr  al- 
'Uranl,  in  Harjaraya; 2  Sa'd  ibn-Kufl  in  al-Mada'in,3  and 
abu-Maryam  al-Sa'di  in  Sawad  al-Kufah.  'All  sent  an 
army  with  a  leader  against  each  one  of  these  Khawarij 
until  all  were  killed.  It  was  in  that  same  year,  in  the  month 
of  Ramadan,  in  the  thirty-eighth  year  of  the  Hijra,  that 
'All  was  killed. 

When  the  rule  passed  over  to  Mu'awiyah,  there  rebelled 
62  against  him  and  his  followers  down  to  the  time  of  the 
Azarikah,  all  who  held  the  same  views  as  the  First  Muhak- 
kimah.  Among  these  was  'Abdallah  ibn-Jausha  al-Ta'I, 
who  arose  against  Mu'awiyah  in  al-Nukhailah,  in  Sawad 
al-Kufah.  Mu'awiyah  sent  men  from  al-Kufah  against 
him,  and  killed  these  Khawarij.  Next  there  arose  against 
him  [Mu'awiyah]  Hautharah  ibn-Wada'  al-'Asadi.  He 
was  among  those  who  sought  the  protection  of  'AH  at  the 
battle  of  al-Nahrawan,  in  the  forty-first  year.  Then  Far- 
wah  ibn-Naufal  al-Ashja'I,4  and  al-Mustaurid  ibn-'Alkamah 
al-Tamimi  rose  against  al-Mughirah  ibn-Shu'bah,5  who 
was  then  the  governor  of  al-Kufah  under  Mu'awiyah.  Both 
of  these  were  killed  in  fighting  him.  Mu'adh  ibn-Jarir  next 
rose  against  al-Mughirah  and  was  killed  in  the  battle.  Then 
Ziyad  ibn-Kharrash  al-'Ijli  arose  against  Ziyad  ibn-Abihi, 

1  De  Goeje  gives  Masabadhan,  Bibliotheca  Geographorum  Arabicorum, 
vol.  vi,  p.  20;  vol.  vii,  p.  25.  See  also  Yakut,  vol.  iii,  p.  393-  As  the 
former  is  a  well-known  place,  we  conclude  that  in  the  text  it  should 
be  Masabadhan. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  7;  one  of  the  provinces  of  the  territory  watered  by 
the  Euphrates  and  Dujail,  west  of  the  Tigris. 

3  Ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  5. 

*TabarI,  ibid.,  vol.  iii,  p.  600;  vol.  iv,  p.  6. 
5  Ibid.,  vol.  iv,  p.  6. 

o2 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

and  was  killed  during  the  fight.  Kuraib  ibn-Murrah  with 
Zahaf  ibn-Rahar  al-Ta'i  arose  against  'Ubaid-Allah  ibn- 
Ziyad.  These  two  put  to  the  sword  everyone  they  met  on 
their  way,  without  distinction.  Ibn-Ziyad  sent  'Ubad  ibn- 
al-Husain  al-Haiti  against  them  with  an  army  which  de- 
feated them.  These  are  the  Khawarij  who  stood  by  the 
First  Muhakkimah  before  the  time  of  the  strife  of  the 
Azarikah,  and  Allah  knows  best. 

2.  Concerning  the  Azarikak.1     These  are  the  followers 
of   Nan'    ibn-al-Azrak   al-Hanafi,   surnamed   abu-Rashid.2 
The  Khawarij  never  had  a  sect  which  surpassed  this  in 
number,  nor  one  that  exceeded  it  in  power.     In  creed  they 
agreed  on  many  points,  among  which  were  the  following: 
the  assertion  that  the  opponents  of  this  sect,  within  the 
Moslem  community,  were  polytheists.     The  First  Muhak- 
kimah had  said  that  such  opponents  were  unbelievers,  but  63 
not  polytheists.    Secondly,  this  sect  asserted  that  those  fol- 
lowers who  abstained  from  fighting  with  them,  although 
agreeing  in   other  respects,   were  polytheists.      The   First 
Muhakkimah   did   not   condemn    such   abstainers,    if   they 
agreed  with  them  in  other  respects.     The  third  point  on 
which  this  sect  agreed  was  that  when  a  soldier  appears, 
claiming  that  he  is  one  of  the  sect,  the  truth  of  his  claim 
should  be  proved  by  bringing  to  him  a  captive  from  the 
opposing  side  whom  he  be  commanded  to  kill.     If  he  kills 
this  captive,  his  claim  that  he  is  one  of  the  sect  is  con- 
firmed; if  he  refuses  to  kill  the  captive,  he  should  be  con- 
sidered a  hypocrite  and  a  heretic,  and  should  be  put  to 
death.      Fourthly,    this   sect   permits   the   killing   of   their 
opponents'  wives,  as  well  as  the  killing  of  their  children. 

1  Dinawari,  al-Akhbdr  al-Tiwdl,  p.  278.  Tabari— De  Goeje,  vol.  ii, 
p.  581. 

3  Shahrastanl,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  133  **  seQ-  Tabari— Zotenberg,  vol.  iv, 
p.  76. 

83 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Moreover,  they  claim  that  the  children  of  those  who 
oppose  them  are  polytheists  and  will  therefore  be  in  hell- 
fire  forever.  What  they  differ  about  is  the  question  as 
to  who  was  the  first  to  put  forward  the  doctrine  which  is 
peculiar  to  the  Azarikah,  namely,  the  declaring  the  Abstain- 
ers from  war,  as  unorthodox.  They  also  disagree  as  re- 
gards the  originator  of  the  trial  of  a  soldier  claiming  to  be 
of  their  army.  Some  of  them  claim  that  the  first  to  orig- 
inate these  views  was  'Abd-Rabbihi  al-Kabir  [the  elder],1 
while  others  say  it  was  'Abd-Rabbihi  al-Saghir  [the 
younger],  and  still  others  that  the  first  was  one  of  their 
men  called  'Abdallah  ibn-al-Wadm.  Nafi'  ibn-al-Azrak 
differed  from  ibn-al-Wadm  and  asked  him  to  change  his 
heretical  view,  but  when  ibn-al-Wadm  died,  Nafi'  and  his 
followers  adopted  his  view,  saying,  "  He  was  in  the  right." 
Nafi*  did  not  consider  that  he  had  been  unorthodox  when  he 
differed  from  ibn-al-Wadm,  but  he  declared  that  person 
unorthodox  who  disagreed  after  he  himself  had  seen  the 
light.  Nor  did  he  separate  himself  from  the  First  Muhak- 
kimah  in  their  refusing  to  condemn  the  Abstainers  as  un- 
orthodox. He  said,  "  In  regard  to  this  point,  we  are  in- 
ferior to  them  [the  Muhakkimah]."  He  therefore  con- 
demned as  unorthodox  those  who,  after  this,  opposed  him 
in  the  matter  of  condemning  the  Abstainers  as  unorthodox. 
Nafi'  and  his  followers  claimed  that  the  home  of  their 
opponents,  within  the  Moslem  community,  was  the  home 
64  of  unbelief;  and  that  it  is  permissible  in  this  home  to  kill 
children  and  women.  The  Azarikah,  however,  rejected  the 
stoning  of  the  adulterer,  while  considering  it  permissible  to 
deny  a  trust,  the  paying  of  which  had  been  commanded  by 
Allah;  the  explanation  they  gave  being,  "  If  our  opponents 
are  polytheists,  then  we  do  not  need  to  give  back  a  deposit 

1  Author  of  al-Ikd  dl-Farid. 

84 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

made  by  them."  Nor  do  they  apply  the  legal  punishment 
to  him  who  brings  a  false  charge  of  adultery  against  a  pious 
man,  although  they  do  in  the  case  of  a  man  who  accuses 
pious  women.  They  also  cut  off  the  hand  of  a  thief, 
whether  the  amount  stolen  be  big  or  little,  thus  ignoring  the 
law  in  regard  to  the  minimum  amount  of  the  stolen  goods.1 
The  community  has  condemned  them  for  this  innovation, 
which  they  introduced  in  connection  with  an  unbelief  in 
which  the  First  Muhakkimah  shared.  In  this  way  one 
heresy  led  to  another,  just  as  anger  incites  anger.  Unbe- 
lievers are  doomed  to  great  torture. 

After  the  Azarikah  had  agreed  on  the  innovations  which 
we  have  mentioned  they  paid  allegiance  to  NarY  ibn-al- 
Azrak,  who  was  called  the  Commander  of  the  Faithful. 
They  were  joined  by  the  Khawarij  of  'Uman  and  al-Yaman, 
their  number  amounting  to  more  than  twenty  thousand. 
They  took  possession  of  al-Ahwaz  2  and  what  is  beyond  it 
of  the  land  of  Persia  and  Kirman,  collecting  its  land-tax. 
The  governor  of  al-Basrah  at  that  time  was  'Abdallah  ibn- 
al-Harith  al-Khuza'i 3  under  'Abdallah  ibn-al-Zubair.  'Ab- 
dallah ibn-al-Harith  despatched  an  army  with  Muslim  ibn- 
'Abs  ibn-Kuraiz  ibn-Habib  ibn-'Abd- Shams  to  fight  the 
Azarikah.  The  two  parties  met  in  Dulab  al-Ahwaz.  In 
this  battle  Muslim  ibn-'Abs  was  killed,  together  with  most 
of  his  followers.  After  this  there  came  against  them  from 
al-Basrah  'Uthman  ibn-'Ubaidallah  ibn-Ma'mar  al-Tamimi 
with  two  thousand  horsemen,  whom  the  Azarikah  put  to 
flight.  Then  there  came  against  them  Harithah  ibn-Badr 
al-Fadani  at  the  head  of  three  thousand  from  the  army  of 

1  According  to   law,   the   seizing   of    anything   under   this   minimum 
amount  is  not  considered  a  theft;  therefore  it  is  not  punishable. 

2  Meynard,  Dictionnaire  de  la  Perse,  p.  57-      Northwestern  province 
of  Persia. 

8  For  an   account  of   this   governor   and  the   successive   battles,   cf. 
Tabari,  ibid.,  vol.  iv,  p.  76  et  seq.    Briinnow,  ibid.,  p.  42  ^  seq.,  52  et  seq. 

85 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

5  c  al-Basrah,  but  the  Azarikah  put  them  also  to  flight.  'Ab- 
dallah  ibn-al-Zubair  then  wrote  from  Mecca  to  al-Muhal- 
lab  ibn-abi-Suf rah,  who  was  at  that  time  in  Khurasan,  com- 
manding him  to  fight  the  Azarikah,  and  making  him  com- 
mander of  this  affair.  So  al-Muhallab  returned  to  al- 
Basrah  and  chose  from  its  army  ten  thousand  men,  and  his 
people  of  the  tribe  of  al-Azd  joined  him,  making  a  total  of 
twenty  thousand  men.  This  army  proceeded  to  fight  the 
Azarikah  and  drove  them  from  Dulab  al-Ahwaz  to  al- 
Ahwaz.    It  was  in  this  flight  that  Nan'  ibn-al-Azrak  died. 

After  his  death  the  Azarikah  paid  allegiance  to  'Ubai- 
dallah  ibn-Ma'mun  al-Tamimi.  Al-Muhallab  then  fought 
them  in  al-Ahwaz,  on  which  occasion  'Ubaidallah  ibn- 
Ma'mun  was  killed,  as  well  as  his  brother  'Uthman  ibn- 
Ma'mun,  together  with  three  hundred  of  the  strongest  of 
the  Azarikah.  Those  who  remained  were  driven  to  'Idhaj,1 
where  they  paid  allegiance  to  Katari  ibn-al-Fuja'ah,  to 
whom  they  gave  the  title  of  the  Commander  of  the  Faithful. 
After  this,  al-Muhallab  fought  them  in  battles  in  which  each 
party  won  alternate  victories,  at  the  end  of  which  the 
Azarikah  were  driven  to  Sabur,2  in  the  land  of  Persia,  which 
they  made  the  land  of  their  flight.  Al-Muhallab,  his  sons 
and  his  followers,  kept  up  the  fight  for  nineteen  years.  Part 
of  this  period  was  in  the  days  of  'Abdallah  ibn-al-Zubair, 
and  the  rest  in  the  time  of  the  caliph  'Abd-al-Malik  ibn- 
Marwan,  during  the  governorship  of  al-Hajjaj  over  al- 
Trak.3  The  latter  confirmed  al-Muhallab  in  his  position  as 
leader  of  the  army  against  the  Azarikah.    This  war  between 

1  'Idhaj  is  a  town  in  al-Ahwaz.  See  De  Goeje,  Bibliotheca  Geogra- 
phorum  Arabicorum,  index,  s.  v.;  Yakut,  Geographisches  Worterbuch, 
vol.  i,  p.  4J6  s.  v. 

2  Meynard,  ibid.,  p.  293.  One  of  the  principal  districts  of  Fars,  not 
far  from  Shiraz. 

sTabari,  ibid.,  vol.  iv,  p.  117  et  seq. 

86 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

al-Muhallab  and  the  Azarikah  kept  on  raging  for  years  in 
different  forms  between  Persia  and  al-Ahwaz,  until  a  differ- 
ence arose  among  the  Azarikah  which  resulted  in  'Abd- 
Rabbihi  the  elder  forsaking  the  Katari  and  going  to  a  valley 
in  Jiraft  Kirmin  *  with  seven  thousand  men.     'Abd-Rabbihi   66 
the  younger  left  him  and  with  four  thousand  men  went  to 
another  district  of  Kirman,  Katari  remaining  with  about 
ten  thousand  men  in  the  land  of  Persia.    There  al-Muhallab 
fought  with  him,  and  drove  him  to  the  land  of  Kirman, 
where  he  pursued  and  fought  him,  driving  him  from  there 
to  al-Rai.2     He  then  attacked  and  killed  'Abd-Rabbihi  the 
elder,  while  he  sent  his  son  Yazld  ibn-al-Muhallab  with  his 
followers  against  'Abd-Rabbihi  the  younger.     At  the  same 
time  al-Hajjaj   sent  Sufyan  ibn-al-Abrad  al-Kalbi  with  a 
great  army  against  Katari  after  he  had  departed  from  al- 
Rai  to  Tabaristan,  where  they  killed  him  and  sent  his  head 
to  al-Hajjaj.    'Ubaidah  ibn-Hilal  al-Yashkuri  had  forsaken 
Katari  and  gone  to  Kumis.     So  Sufyan  ibn-al-Abrad  fol- 
lowed and  besieged  him  in  the  fortress  of  Kumis  until  he 
succeeded   in  killing  him  and  his   followers.     Allah  thus 
cleared  the  earth  of  the  Azarikah — praise  Allah  for  that! 

3.  Concerning  the  Najadat.  These  were  the  followers 
of  Najdah  ibn-'Amir  al-Hanafi.3  The  cause  of  his  leader- 
ship and  authority  was  that  when  Nan'  ibn-al-Azrak  de- 
clared unorthodox  those  who  abstained  from  fighting, 
though  they  agreed  with  him  in  belief,  he  called  them  poly- 
theists,  and  sanctioned  the  killing  of  the  children  of  his 
opponents    and   their   women.      Abu-Kudail,4    'Ativan    al- 

1  Meynard,  ibid.,  p.  185,  town  in  Kirman. 

2  De  Goeje,  ibid.,  vol.  vi,  pp.  20  and  22,  town  in  Persia. 

3  For  Najdah  and  the  other  leaders  of  this  sect  see  ShahrastanI, 
ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  136.  Briinnow,  ibid.,  p.  46  et  seq.  Tabarl,  ibid.,  vol. 
iv,  p.  102. 

*  Probably  a  mistake  for  abu-Fudaik,  he  being  the  other  great 
schismatic  in  this  sect.     ShahrastanI,  vol.  i,  p.  136. 

87 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Hanafi,  Rashid  al-Tawil,  Miklas  and  'Aiyub  al-Azrak  for- 
sook Naf?  with  all  their  followers,  departing  for  al-Yama- 
mah,  where  Najdah  received  them  with  an  army  of  those 
Khawarij  who  desired  to  follow  the  army  of  Nafi'.  They 
told  them  of  NafV's  latest  theories  and  sent  them  back  to 
6y  al-Yamamah,  where  they  swore  allegiance  to  Najdah  ibn- 
'Amir.  These  men  condemned  as  unbelievers  those  who 
had  in  turn  condemned  the  Abstainers  as  unbelievers.  They 
also  condemned  whoever  admitted  the  Imamate  of  Nafi', 
making  Najdah  the  Imam.  About  him,  however,  they  soon 
differed,,  complaining  of  various  things.  These  disagree- 
ments led  to  their  division  into  three  sects.  One  of  these 
sects  went  with  'Ativan  ibn-al-Aswad  al-Hanaf I  to  Sijistan,1 
where  the  Khawarij  of  Sijistan  joined  them;  and  it  is  be- 
cause of  this  that  the  Khawarij  of  Sijistan  are  called  'Ata- 
wiyah.  The  second  sect  joined  abu-Kudail  [Fudaik]  in 
battle  against  Najdah.  They  are  the  ones  who  killed  Naj- 
dah. The  third  sect  broke  with  Najdah  in  regard  to  his 
theories  but  accepted  his  Imamate.  Among  the  deeds  of 
Najdah  for  which  his  followers  blamed  him  was  the  fact 
that  he  sent  an  army  to  attack  by  mainland  and  one  to  attack 
by  sea,  and  to  the  one  which  he  sent  by  land  he  assigned 
higher  stipends  than  to  the  one  which  he  sent  by  sea.  They 
complained,  moreover,  that  he  had  sent  an  army  to  attack 
the  city  of  the  Prophet  of  Allah  and  had  seized  there  a 
daughter  of  'Uthman  ibn-'Affan.  'Abd-al-Malik  having 
written  to  him  about  her,  he  had  bought  her  back  from  the 
one  in  whose  possession  she  was,  and  had  given  her  back  to 
'Abd-al-Malik  ibn-Marwan.  They  therefore  said  to  him, 
:i  Verily  thou  hast  returned  to  our  enemies  a  maiden  who 
belongs  to  us."  They  further  complained  because  he  par- 
doned those  who  committed  faults  in  misdirected  zeal,  ex- 

1  De  Goeje:  ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  35. 

88 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

cusing  them  on  the  ground  of  ignorance.     The  explanation 
of   this   was   that  his  son  al-Muttarih  was   sent  with   an 
army  to  al-Katif,1  which  they  attacked,  taking  the  women 
and  children  prisoners.     They  then  took  possession  of  the 
women  for  themselves,  and  married  them  before  the  fifth 
of  the  booty  had  been  taken  out  for  the  state.    Concerning 
this  they  said :  "  The  women  fell  to  our  share,  which  is  our 
desire.     If  their  price  surpasses  our  share  of  the  booty,  we 
will  make  up  for  it  from  our  own  property."    When  they 
returned  to  Najdah,  they  asked  him  about  what  they  had 
done  in  seizing  the  women,  and  in  eating  food  from  the 
booty  before  the  fifth  had  been  taken  out,  and  before  the 
four-fifths  had  been  divided  among  the  soldiers.     Najdah 
said  to  them,  "  You  should  not  have  done  this."    They  an- 
swered, "  We  did  not  know  that  this  was  not  permitted  us." 
Whereupon  he  forgave  them  because  of  their  ignorance. 
Then  he  said,  "  There  are  two  things  in  religion.     One  is 
the  recognition  of  Allah,  and  the  recognition  of  his  proph- 
ets, the  interdiction  of  the  shedding  of  the  blood  of  a  Mos- 
lem, the  interdiction  of  robbing  the  wealth  of  a  Moslem, 
and  the  recognition  of  all  that  comes  from  Allah.     This 
recognition  is  incumbent  on  everyone  who  has  attained  the 
age  of  puberty.    And  the  second  includes  all  other  require- 
ments of  religion.    Man  is  forgiven  for  ignorance  in  regard 
to  the  latter,  until  there  dawns  upon  him  the  distinction 
between  that  which  is  permissible  and  that  which  is  for- 
bidden.    Now,  whoever  in  his  (misdirected)  zeal  considers 
a  thing  which  is  forbidden  permissible,  he  shall  be  forgiven. 
And  he  who,  before  the  evidence  is  established,  assumes 
punishment  for  the  zealot  who  commits  a  fault,  is  an  unbe- 
liever."    Another  innovation  of  Najdah  was  that  he  took 
under  his  protection  those  of  his  followers  who  held  to  the 
punishments  fixed  by  law,  and  he  said,  "  Perhaps  Allah  will 

1  De  Goeje,  ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  152,  town  in  Bahrain. 

39 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

punish  them  for  their  sins  in  some  place  other  than  hell-fire, 
and  then  have  them  enter  paradise."  Moreover,  he  claimed 
that  anyone  disagreeing  with  his  religious  views  would 
enter  hell-fire. 

Another  of  his  errors  was  that  he  annulled  the  punish- 
ment [hadd]  for  drinking  wine.  He  also  said,  "  Whoever 
commits  a  minor  sin  or  tells  a  small  lie,  and  persists  in  it, 
he  is  a  polytheist;  while  he  who  commits  adultery  and 
steals,  and  takes  a  drink  without  making  a  habit  of  it,  he  is 
a  Moslem,"  provided  such  a  man  agreed  with  him  [Najdah] 
in  the  principles  of  his  faith.  When  he  had  originated  these 
innovations,  and  had  forgiven  his  followers  because  they 
had  acted  in  ignorance,  most  of  his  followers  asked  him  to 
renounce  his  innovations,  saying,  "  Go  into  the  mosque  and 
69  repent  of  your  innovations."  This  he  did,  and  it  resulted 
in  having  some  regret  his  repentance,  and  join  those  who 
had  sided  with  him  and  said  to  him,  "  Thou  art  the  Imam, 
and  to  thee  belongs  the  right  to  explain  the  law,  and  it  would 
not  be  seemly  for  us  to  ask  thee  to  renounce  anything. 
Therefore  repent  for  having  repented  and  let  them  recant 
who  made  thee  recant;  if  not  we  will  desert  thee."  And 
he  did  so.  His  followers,  therefore,  were  divided  concern- 
ing him,  the  majority  deposing  him  and  saying,  "  Choose 
us  an  Imam."  So  he  chose  abu-Fudaik;  Rashid  al-Tawil 
was  hand  in  glove  with  abu-Fudaik.  And  when  abu-Fudaik 
became  governor  of  al-Yamamah,  he  learned  that  the  fol- 
lowers of  Najdah,  on  returning  from  fighting  the  infidels, 
would  reinstate  Najdah  as  head.  Naj  dan's  slave,  however, 
sought  to  kill  him,  so  he  hid  himself  in  the  dwelling  of  one 
of  his  followers,  looking  for  the  return  of  his  soldiers  whom 
he  had  sent  to  the  seacoast  of  Syria  and  the  districts  of  al- 
Yaman.  Meanwhile  a  proclamation  was  given  by  abu- 
Fudaik:  "  Whoever  shows  us  the  way  to  Najdah,  he  shall 
be  rewarded  with  ten  thousand  dirhems.     And  the  slave 

90 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

who  brings  us  to  him,  he  shall  be  free."    Thereupon  a  maid 
of  those  with  whom  Najdah  was  hiding  pointed  out  the  way 
to  him,  and  abu-Fudaik  sent  Rashid  al-Tawil  to  him  with 
an  army.     They  surprised  him,  and  brought  his  head  to 
abu-Fudaik.     After  Najdah  was  killed,  the  Najadat  were 
divided  into  three  sects.      One   sect  condemned  him  and 
went  over  to  abu-Fudaik.     This  sect  included  Rashid  al- 
Tawil,  abu-Baihas,  and  abu-1-Shamrakh,  and  their  follow- 
ers.    Another  sect  pardoned  him  for  what  he  had  done, 
these  being  the  present  Najadat;  while  the  third  sect  de- 
parted from  al-Yamamah,  and  settled  near  al-Basrah,  where   70 
they  doubted  the  story  of  the  innovations  of  Najdah,  and 
were  undecided  concerning  him,  saying,  "  We  do  not  know 
whether  he  made  these  innovations  or  not,  and  we  will  not 
desert  him  without  sure  knowledge."     Abii-Fudaik  lived 
after  the  death  of  Najdah  until  'Abd-al-Malik  ibn-Marwan 
sent  Ya'mur  ibn-'Ubaidallah  ibn-Ma  mar  al-Taimi  against 
him  with  an  army.     They  killed  abu-Fudaik  and  sent  his 
head  to  'Abd-al-Malik  ibn-Marwan.    This  ends  the  story  of 
the  Najadat. 

4.  Concerning  the  Sufriyah.  These  are  the  followers  of 
Ziyad  ibn-al-Asfar.1  Their  views  are  in  the  main  like  those 
of  the  Azarikah,  namely,  that  those  who  commit  sins  are 
polytheists;  except  that  the  Sufriyah  do  not  sanction  the 
killing  of  the  women  and  the  children  of  those  who  differ 
in  belief  from  them,  while  the  Azarikah  do  sanction  it.  One 
division  of  the  Sufriyah  claims  that  when  a  deed  for  which 
there  is  definite  punishment  is  committed,  the  author  of  that 
deed  should  be  called  only  by  the  name  connected  with  the 
nature  of  the  deed,  e.  g.  adulterer,  thief,  calumniator  or  in- 
tentional murderer.  He  is  not  an  unbeliever  or  a  poly- 
theist.     In  all  sins,  however,  for  which  there  is  no  definite 

1  Shahrastani,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  154. 

ail 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

punishment,  such  as  the  omitting  of  the  prayer  or  of  the 
fast,  such  deeds  being  heretical,  their  authors  are  unbe- 
lievers   

( Manuscript  is  not  clear  at  this  point. ) 

The  third  sect  of  the  Sufriyah  asserted  the  same  thing  as 
the  Baihasiyah,  *.  e.  that  the  sinner  should  not  be  judged  as 
an  unbeliever  until  he  has  been  brought  before  the  governor 
and  punished. 

Thus  the  Sufriyah  were  divided  into  three  sects.  One  sect 
which  claimed,  as  did  the  Azarikah,  that  the  authors  of  any 
sin  were  all  polytheists.  The  second  claimed  that  the  title 
of  unbeliever  should  be  given  to  the  author  of  deeds  which 
deserved  no  definite  punishment,  punishable  sins  being  a 
j i  departing  from  belief,  but  not  an  entrance  into  unbelief. 
The  third  claimed  that  the  title  of  unbeliever  should  be 
given  to  the  authors  of  all  sins  which  were  punished  by  the 
governor.  These  three  sects  of  the  Sufriyah  differ  from 
the  Azarikah  as  regards  children  and  women,  as  has  been 
explained  above. 

All  the  Sufriyah  consider  themselves  to  be  under  the 
patronage  of  'Abdallah  ibn-Wahb  al-Rasibi,  and  Hurkus 
ibn-Zuhair  and  their  followers  from  among  the  First  Mu- 
hakkimah.  They  claim,  moreover,  that  after  the  death  of 
the  men  already  mentioned,  they  are  under  the  Imamate  of 
abu-Bilal  Mirdas  al-Khariji,  and  after  him  of  Tmran  ibn- 
Hittan  al-Sadwisi.  As  to  abu-Bilal  Mirdas,1  in  the  days  of 
Yazid  ibn-Mu'awiyah,  he  rose  in  al-Basrah  against  'Ubai- 
dallah  ibn-Ziyad.  'Ubaidallah  ibn-Ziyad  sent  against  him 
Zur'ah  ibn-Muslim  al-'Amiri,  with  two  thousand  cavalry. 
As  it  happened,  Zur'ah  sympathized  with  the  views  of  the 
Khawarij,  and  when  both  sides  stood  in  battle  array,  Zur'ah 
said  to  abu-Bilal,  "  You  are  on  the  side  of  truth,  but  we 

^abarl-De  Goeje,  vol.  ii,  pp.  186,  390.     Briinnow,  ibid.,  p.  35. 

92 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

fear  ibn-Ziyad  lest  he  cancel  our  stipends,  so  there  is  noth- 
ing for  us  but  to  fight  you."  Abu-Bilal  answered,  "I  should 
have  liked  to  adopt  toward  you  the  view  of  my  brother 
'Urwah  who  advised  me  to  slay  you  indiscriminately,  as 
Kuraib  and  Zahaf  *  slew  indiscriminately  certain  men  with 
the  sword,  but  I  disagree  with  both  them  and  my  brother." 
Thereupon  abu-Bilal  and  his  followers  attacked  and  de- 
feated Zur'ah  and  his  army.  Then  'Ubaidallah  ibn-Ziyad 
sent  against  him  Tbad  ibn-Akhdar  al-Tamiml,  who  fought 
abu-Bilal  in  Tauwaj  2  and  killed  him,  together  with  his  fol- 
lowers. When  the  news  of  the  death  of  abu-Bilal  reached 
ibn-Ziyad,  he  killed  those  of  the  Sufriyah  whom  he  found 
in  al-Basrah,  and  having  seized  'Urwah,  the  brother  of  72 
Mirdas,  he  said  to  him,  "  O  enemy  of  Allah,  thou  didst  ad- 
vise thy  brother  Mirdas  to  slay  men  indiscriminately.  Allah 
has  avenged  these  men  on  thee  and  thy  brother."  By  his 
orders  'Urwah' s  hands  and  feet  were  cut  off,  and  he  was 
crucified.  When  Mirdas  was  killed,  the  Sufriyah  made 
Tmran  ibn-Hittan,  Imam.  He  is  the  man  who  wrote  elegies 
in  verse  on  Mirdas,  in  one  of  which  he  said : 3 

"  After  thee,  I  know  not  what  I  thought  I  knew  before, 
After  thee,  O  Mirdas,  men  are  no  longer  men." 

This  Imran  ibn-Hittan  was  a  hermit  poet,  believing  strongly 
in  the  school  of  the  Sufriyah.  An  instance,  however,  of  his 
ignominy  in  an  attack  on  'All  is  that  he  wrote  an  elegy  on 
'Abd-al-Rahman  ibn-Muljim 4  who  stabbed  'AH,  and  said : 

lTabari,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  pp.  90,  91. 

2  De  Goeje,  ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  242,  town  in  Persia. 

3  Noeldeke,  Delectus  veterum  carminum  Arabiconim,  p.  90.  Tabarl, 
Annates,  vol.  i,  p.  3064.  Shahrastani,  vol.  i,  p.  134-  Abu-1-Mahasin ; 
Annates,  p.  24.  Kitdb  al-Aghdnl,  vol.  xvi,  p.  152  et  seq.,  this  poem  not 
quoted. 

4  Tabari-Zotenberg,  vol.  iii,  p.  706,  'All's  murderer.  Kitdb  al-Aghdni 
(reads  Karim  instead  of  Munib.  Karim  means  nobleman),  vol.  xvi, 
p.  153. 

93 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

"  O  blow  from  a  penitent,  who,  in  giving  it,  only  desired  to  bring  down 
favor  from  the  possessor  of  the  Throne, 
I  will  mention  him  now,  and  I  will  consider  him  the  richest  of  crea- 
tures before  Allah,  when  it  comes  to  the  final  weighing  of 
deeds." 

'Abd-al-Kahir  says  he  answered  that  poem  with  the  follow- 
ing verse : 

"  O  blow  from  an  unbeliever  who  did  not  profit  by  it,  except  by  the  fact 
that  it  makes  him  burn  in  hell  fire. 
Verily  I  curse  him  for  his  religion  and  I  curse  also  anyone  who  hopes 

for  him  at  any  time,  forgiveness  and  pardon. 
This  ibn-Muljim  is  the  worst  of  men,  he  is  the  lightest  in  the  scales 
of  the  Lord  of  men." 

5.  Concerning  the  'Ajaridah  of  the  Khawarij.  All  of 
them  are  the  followers  of  'Abd-al-Karim  ibn-'Ajrad,1  who 

73  was  a  follower  of  'Ativan  ibn-al-Aswad  al-Hanafi.  The 
'Ajaridah  were  divided  into  ten  sects  which  agreed  on  the 
view  that  a  child  is  to  be  called  to  Islam  when  it  has  attained 
maturity,  having  been  left  in  freedom  before  this  until  it  is 
called  to  Islam,  or  speaks  of  it  itself.  Another  matter  in 
which  they  differed  from  the  Azarikah  is  that  the  latter 
considered  it  permissible  to  seize  the  possessions  of  their  op- 
ponents under  all  conditions.  The  'Ajaridah,  on  the  other 
hand,  do  not  consider  it  lawful  to  seize  the  possessions  of  the 
opponent  as  booty  until  after  killing  the  owner.  All  the 
'Ajaridah  agreed  on  this  at  first,  but  later  sects  divided  off 
from  them,  of  whom  we  will  speak  below. 

6.  Concerning  the  Khazimiyah.2  These  include  most  of 
the  'Ajaridah  of  Sijistan.  This  sect  agrees  with  the  Sun- 
nites  as  regards  predestination,  freedom  of  choice  and  will. 
In  other  words,  they  hold  that  there  is  no  creator  but  Allah, 

1  Shahrastanl,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  143. 

2  Ibid.    Charimlyah — cf.  footnote,  vol.  i,  p.  146. 

94 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

and  nothing  is  done  unless  Allah  desires  it.    Moreover,  they 
hold  that  freedom  of  choice  comes  with  the  deed.    As  a  re- 
sult, they  condemn  as  unbelievers  the  Maimumyah  who,  in 
regard  to  predestination  and  freedom  of  choice,  agree  with 
the  view  of  the  Kadariyah,  who  have  strayed   from  the 
truth.    Furthermore,  the  Khazimiyah  differed  from  the  rest 
of    the    Khawarij    over    the   question    of    friendship   and 
hatred.    They  said,  "  Verily  both  of  these  are  predicates  of 
Allah."     They  hold  that  Allah  loves  a  man  for  whatever 
faith  he  exhibits,  even  if  he  has  been  an  unbeliever  for 
most  of  his  life.     But,  on  the  other  hand,  if  a  man  be- 
comes an  unbeliever  at  the  end  of  his  life,  Allah  keeps  aloof 
from  him,  even  though  he  has  been  a  believer  all  the  rest  of 
his  life.     They  also  claim  that  Allah  does  not  cease  loving 
his  friends  or  hating  his  enemies;  agreeing  with  the  Sun- 
nites  concerning  the  perfection  of  man,  except  that  these 
differed  from  the  Khazimiyah  in  this,  holding  that  'Ali, 
Talhah,  al-Zubair  and  'Uthman  were  in  Paradise,  because 
they  were  of  those  who  took  the  Oath  of  Allegiance,  about   74 
whom  Allah  said,  "Allah  has  had  mercy  upon  the  faithful, 
lo  they  made  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  thee  under  the  tree." 
(Surah  48,  v.  18.)     And  they  said  unto  them,  "  since  the 
mercy  of  Allah  is  visited  upon  one  who  God  knows  will  die 
in  faith,  it  must  follow  that  those  who  took  the  oath  under 
the  tree  should  be  among  those  to  whom  mercy  is  shown. 
'AH  and  Talhah  and  al-Zubair  were  among  them,  but  'Uth- 
man was  a  prisoner  on  that  day,  and  the  prophet  promised 
allegiance  to  them,  putting  his  own  hand  in  the  place  of 
'Uthman's.     By  this  means  is  proven  the  falsity  of  those 
who  consider  these  four  to  be  unbelievers." 

7.  Concerning  the  Shu'aibiyah.  In  their  views  about  pre- 
destination, freedom  of  choice,  and  will  they  agree  with  the 
view  of   the  Khazimiyah.     Any  possible  account  of  the 

95 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Shu'aibiyah  appears  first  when  their  leader,  Shu'aib,1  dif- 
fered with  a  man  of  the  Khawarij  whose  name  was  Mai- 
mun. Their  cause  of  difference  was  that  Shu'aib  owed 
Maimun  money,  over  which  they  had  a  law  suit,  and  Shu'aib 
said  to  him,  "  I  will  pay  thee,  if  Allah  desires."  Maimun 
answered,  "  Allah  has  already  desired  it  this  minute."  So 
Shu'aib  replied,  "  If  he  has  really  desired  it,  I  can  have 
done  nothing  but  paid  it."  And  Maimun  said,  "  Allah  has 
commanded  thee  to  do  this,  and  he  commands  only  what 
he  desires,  while  that  which  he  does  not  desire  he  does 
not  command."  It  was  after  this  that  the  'Ajaridah  were 
divided,  some  of  them  following  Shu'aib  and  the  rest 
Maimun. 

Regarding  this  point  they  wrote  to  'Abd-al-Karim  ibn- 
'Ajrad  who  was  then  imprisoned  by  the  Sultan,  and  in  an- 
swer to  them  he  wrote,  "  We  say  that  what  Allah  desires 
happens,  and  what  he  does  not  desire  does  not  happen,  and 
we  do  not  impute  evil  to  Allah."  This  answer  arrived  after 
the  death  of  ibn-'Ajrad.  Maimun  claimed  that  'Ajrad  had 
75  decided  according  to  his  [Maimun's]  opinion  because  he 
said,  "  We  do  not  impute  evil  to  Allah."  Shu'aib,  however, 
said,  "  No,  he  agreed  with  me  because  he  said,  we  hold  the 
opinion  that  what  Allah  desires  happens,  and  what  he  does 
not  desire  does  not  happen."  The  Khazimiyah,  and  most 
of  the  'Ajaridah,  sympathized  with  Shu'aib,  while  the  Ham- 
ziyah  and  the  Kadariyah  sympathized  with  Maimun. 

The  Maimuniyah  then  added  to  their  unbeliefs  in  regard 
to  predestination  a  kind  of  Magianism.  They  permitted 
marriage  with  granddaughters  on  both  sides ;  and  they  be- 
lieved it  was  a  divine  command  to  fight  a  tyrannical  ruler, 
and  whoever  was  satisfied  with  his  rule.  As  to  anyone  who 
refused  their  view,  they  do  not  believe  in  killing  him  except 

1  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  146. 

96 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

when  he  is  opposed  to  them,  attacks  their  religion,  or  acts 
as  guide  to  the  undesirable  ruler.  In  the  next  chapter,  if 
Allah  pleases,  we  shall  mention  the  Maimuniyah  among  the 
sects  of  the  Ghulat  who  deserted  the  true  faith.  Now  there 
was  a  man  among  the  Maimuniyah  called  Khalaf  who  dif- 
fered from  the  Maimuniyah  as  to  predestination  as  well  as 
freedom  of  choice,  and  will.  In  these  three  things  he  agreed 
with  the  view  of  the  Sunnites;  he  was  followed  by  the 
Khawarij  of  Karman  and  Mukran.  They  were,  therefore, 
called  Khalaf  lyah  and  are  the  ones  who  fought  Hamzah 
ibn-Akrak  al-KharijI x  in  the  land  of  Karman. 

8.  Concerning  the  Khalaf  lyah.  These  are  the  followers 
of  Khalaf,2  who  fought  Hamzah  al-Khariji.  The  Khala- 
f  lyah  do  not  believe  in  fighting  except  under  an  Imam.  This 
forced  them  to  withhold  from  fighting  because  of  the  lack 
of  anyone  among  them  suited  to  be  an  Imam.  These  Khala- 
fiyah  tended  to  agree  with  the  Azarikah  in  one  thing, 
namely,  they  believed  that  the  children  of  their  opponents 
are  in  hell. 

9.  Concerning  the  Ma'lumlyah  and  the  Majhuliyah* 
These  sects  are  branches  of  the  main  Khazimiyah.  The 
Ma'lumiyah  differed  from  their  predecessors  the  Khazi- 
miyah in  two  things,  namely,  they  claimed  that  whoever  did 
not  recognize  Allah  by  all  his  names,  that  man  was  ignorant 
of  him  (Allah),  and  anyone  ignorant  of  him  was  an  unbe- 
liever. Secondly,  they  said  that  the  acts  of  men  are  not 4 
created  by  Allah.  They  agreed,  however,  concerning  free- 
dom of  choice,  and  will,  with  the  Sunnites,  holding  that 
freedom  of  choice  goes  with  the  deed,  and  that  it  cannot  be 
carried  out  unless  Allah  wishes.    This  sect  claimed  the  right 

1  ShahrastanI  gives  Adrak,  vol.  i,  p.  144. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  145.  *  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  151. 
4  ShahrastanI  has  "  are  created,"  without  the  negative. 

97 


76 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

of  the  Imamate  for  someone  in  its  own  group,  who  goes 
out  with  the  sword  against  his  enemies ;  they  did  not,  how- 
ever, excommunicate  those  among  them  who  were  Ab- 
stainers. 

As  to  the  Majhuliyah,  their  views  are  like  those  of  the 
Ma'lumlyah  except  that  they  hold  that  he  who  recognizes 
Allah  by  some  of  his  names  (if  not  all)  really  knows  him, 
and  in  this  matter  they  condemned  the  Ma'lumlyah  as  unbe- 
lievers. 

10.  Concerning  the  Saltlyah.1  These  take  their  name 
from  Salt  ibn-'Uthman,  who  is  also  called  ibn-abi-al-Salt. 
He  belonged  to  the  'Ajaridah,  except  that  he  said :  "  When 
a  man  agrees  with  us  and  becomes  a  Moslem,  we  accept 
him,  but  not  his  children,  for  they  are  not  real  Moslems 
until  they  are  of  age,  when  they  are  invited  into  Islam  and 
accept  it." 

Side  by  side  with  this  sect  was  another  sect,  the  ninth  sect 
of  the  'Ajaridah,  who  claimed  that  neither  the  children  of 
believers  nor  the  children  of  polytheists  were  friends  or  foes 
until  they  had  attained  maturity,  when  they  were  invited  to 
Islam  and  received  or  refused  it. 

ii.  Concerning  the  Hamziyak.  These  are  the  followers 
j j  of  Hamzah  ibn-Akrak  (see  above)  who  laid  waste  Sijistan, 
Khurasan,  Mukran,2  Kuhistan,3  and  Karman,  and  de- 
feated their  big  armies.  He  at  first  belonged  to  the  'Aja- 
ridah of  the  Khazimiyah,  but  came  to  differ  from  them  over 
predestination  and  freedom  of  choice,  agreeing  in  these 
matters  with  the  Kadariyah.  The  Khazimiyah,  therefore, 
condemned  him  as  unbelieving  in  this  respect.  Moreover,  he 
claimed  that  the  children  of  polytheists  are  condemned  to 

2Not  given  by  Shahrastani.  M.  Horten,  Die  Philosophischen  System  e 
der  speculativen  Theologen  im  Islam,  p.  62. 

2  De  Goeje,  ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  242,  country  next  to  Karman. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  49- 

98 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

hell,  for  which  view  the  Kadariyah  condemned  him  as  an 
unbeliever.  He  then  made  a  covenant  with  the  Abstainers 
among  the  Khawarij,  in  consonance  with  his  views  on  the 
abjuration  of  whoever  does  not  agree  with  him  on  the  sub- 
ject of  fighting  those  within  the  sects  of  this  religion  who 
disagree  with  his  view,  calling  them  polytheists.  Wherever 
he  fought  and  defeated  some  enemy  he  commanded  their 
possessions  to  be  burned  and  their  animals  slaughtered,  and 
at  the  same  time  killed  the  prisoners  taken  from  those  who 
disagreed  with  him.  His  appearance  was  in  the  days  of 
Harun  al-Rashid,  in  the  year  179.  His  uprising  lasted  until 
the  early  part  of  the  caliphate  of  al-Ma'mun.  When  he 
took  possession  of  some  provinces,  he  installed  as  his  Kadi 
over  them  abu-Yahya  Yusuf  ibn-Bashshar,  as  leader  of  his 
army  a  man  by  the  name  of  Jiwaih  ibn-Ma'bad,  and  as 
leader  of  his  bodyguard  'Amr  ibn-Sa'id.  Many  of  the  poets 
of  the  Khawarij  joined  him,  such  as  Talhah  ibn-Fahd, 
abu-1-Julandi  and  others.  He  started  hostilities  against  the 
Baihaslyah  of  the  Khawarij,  most  of  whom  he  killed,  so 
that  it  was  after  this  that  he  was  called  the  Commander  of 
the  Faithful     The  poet  Talhah  ibn-Fahd  said  about  this  : 

"  The  Commander  of  the  Faithful  is  on  the  right  way  and  under  the 
best  of  guidance, 
What  a  marvelous  commander,  surpassing  the  other  commanders  just 
as  the  shining  moon  surpasses  the  small  star." 

It  was  after  this  that  Hamzah  made  a  raid  against  the  7% 
Khazimiyah  among  the  Khawarij  in  a  part  of  the  country 
known  as  Faljard,1  killing  great  numbers  of  them.  Then 
he  himself  went  to  Hirat,2  whose  people  prevented  him  from 
entering  it,  but  he  fought  those  outside  of  the  city  and  put 
them  to  the  sword.     Then  'Amr  ibn-Yazid  al-Azdi,  who  at 

1  Ibid.,  vols,  iii-iv,  index. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  18,  province  of  Khurasan. 

99 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

this  time  was  governor  of  Hirat,  came  against  him  with  an 
army.  The  battle  between  them  lasted  for  months.  A  great 
many  from  the  land  of  Hirat  were  killed,  including  the 
Schismatics,  the  followers  of  Haisam  al-Shari.1  The  mis- 
sionaries of  Hamzah  urged  the  people  to  join  in  his  error. 

Hamzah  then  attacked  Karukh  in  the  vicinity  of  Hirat, 
burning  the  possessions  of  the  people  and  laying  waste  their 
trees.  After  this  he  fought  'Amr  ibn-Yazid  al-Azdi  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Btishanj  (or  kh?),2  in  a  battle  in  which 
'Amr  was  killed.  'All  ibn-'Isa  ibn-Hadiyan,  who  was  then 
governor  of  Khurasan,  now  took  part  in  the  war  against 
Hamzah,  who  was  forced  to  flee  from  him  into  the  land  of 
Sijistan  after  he  had  killed  sixty  men  of  his  leaders,  not 
to  mention  his  followers.  When  he  reached  Sijistan,  the 
people  of  Zaranj  3  prevented  his  entering  their  town,  so  he 
slaughtered  some  of  them  with  the  sword  in  the  wastes  near 
the  town.  He  then  disguised  himself  from  them  (the  people 
of  Zaranj)  by  putting  his  followers  into  black,  which  gave 
them  the  appearance  of  being  the  followers  of  the  Sultan.4 
They  were  warned  of  this,  however,  and  succeeded  in  pre- 
venting his  entrance  into  their  city.  He  therefore  laid  waste 
the  palms  in  their  forests  and  killed  those  passing  through 
their  wastes.  He  then  went  in  the  direction  of  the  river 
Sha'bah  and  there  killed  most  of  the  Khalafiyah  from 
among  the  Khawarij,  cutting  down  their  trees,  burning 
their  possessions,  and  driving  away  their  leader  called 
Mas'ud  ibn-Kais,  who  in  his  flight  fell  into  the  river  he  was 
crossing.  His  followers  are  in  doubt  about  his  death,  and 
79   still  look  for  his  appearance.     Hamzah  thereupon  returned 

1  Shahrastani,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  119. 

aDe  Goeje,  ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  18,  province  of  Khurasan. 
5  Ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  50,  town  in  Sijistan. 

4  The    'Abbaside    party   wore    black.      Banning,    Muhammed    ibn    al- 
Hanafija,  p.  72.    Melanges  de  la  Faculte  Orientale,  vol.  v,  p.  439. 

100 


THE  SECTS  OE  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

from  Karman,  and  on  his  way  fell  upon  the  district  of  Bust, 
one  of  the  districts  of  Nisabur,  where  he  killed  some  of  the 
Tha'alibah  Khawarij  who  were  there.  This  uprising  in 
Khurasan,  Karman,  Kahistan  and  Sijistan  lasted  till  the 
end  of  the  days  of  al-Rashid,  and  the  beginning  of  the 
caliphate  of  al-Ma'mun,  because  the  greater  part  of  the 
army  of  Khurasan  was  busy  fighting  Rafi'  ibn-Laith  ibn- 
Nasr  ibn-Saiyar  x  at  the  gate  of  Samarkand. 

When  al-Ma'mun  came  into  the  caliphate  he  wrote  Ham- 
zah  a  letter  in  which  he  demanded  his  adherence,  which 
merely  increased  Hamzah's  pride.  Al-Ma'mun,  therefore, 
sent  Tahir  ibn-al-Husain  2  to  fight  Hamzah,  and  a  war  fol- 
lowed between  Tahir  and  Hamzah.  About  thirty  thousand 
were  killed  on  both  sides,  most  of  them  being  followers  of 
Hamzah.  In  this  battle  Hamzah  was  driven  to  Karman. 
Then  Tahir  attacked  the  Abstainers  who  agreed  with  Ham- 
zah in  theory,  and  captured  three  hundred  of  them.  He 
then  commanded  that  all  the  men  be  bound  together  with 
ropes  between  two  trees  whose  tops  had  been  made  to  touch 
one  another ;  the  man  between  the  two  trees  was  then  cut  in 
half,  and  each  one  of  the  two  trees  bounded  back  with  half 
cf  the  body  bound  to  it.  After  this  al-Ma'mun  recalled 
Tahir  ibn-al-Husain  from  Khurasan,  and  sent  him  to  his 
headquarters.  Hamzah  now  became  very  covetous  of  Khu- 
rasan and  proceeded  from  Karman  with  an  army.  He 
was  met  by  'Abd-al-Rahman  al-Nisaburi,  with  twenty  thou- 
sand strong  from  Nisabur  and  vicinity.  With  the  help  of 
Allah,  Hamzah  was  put  to  flight  and  thousands  of  his  fol- 
lowers killed.  Hamzah  ran  away  while  wounded,  and  died 
during  the  flight.  By  his  death  Allah  gave  the  world  relief  ^ 
from  him  and  from  his  followers.  This  battle,  after  which 
Hamzah  the  Kharijite  and  Kadarite  perished,  was  one  of 

1  Tabari-Zotenberg,  vol.  iv,  p.  471  et  seq. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  484  et  seq. 

101 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

the  events  of  which  the  people  of  Nisabiir  boasted,  praise 
Allah  for  this. 

12.  Concerning  the  Tha'alibah.  These  are  the  followers 
of  Tha'labah  ibn-Mashkan.1  The  Tha'alibah  claim  his 
Imamate  as  a  successor  to  'Abd-al-Karim  ibn-'Ajrad.  It  is 
claimed  that  'Abd-al-Karim  ibn-'Ajrad  was  Imam  until 
Tha'labah  differed  from  him  over  the  judgment  of  chil- 
dren. When  the  two  differed  over  this  ibn-'Ajrad  was  con- 
demned and  Tha'labah  became  Imam.  The  reason  for  their 
difference  was  that  a  man  of  the  'Ajaridah  asked  Tha'labah 
for  his  daughter's  hand,  whereupon  Tha'labah  said  to  him : 
"  Show  her  dowry."  The  suitor  then  sent  a  woman  to  the 
mother  of  the  daughter  to  ask  her  if  the  daughter  was  of 
age,  for  if  she  was  of  age  and  had  embraced  Islam,  according 
to  the  stipulations  which  the  'Ajaridah  require,  it  did  not 
matter  what  her  dowry  was.  Her  mother  said  :  "  Whether 
she  be  of  age  or  not,  since  her  guardian  is  a  Moslem,  she 
is  one."  'Abd-al-Karim  ibn-'Ajrad  was  notified  of  this,  as 
well  as  Tha'labah  ibn-Mashkan.  'Abd-al-Karim  preferred 
to  maintain  the  independence  of  children  before  maturity, 
while  Tha'labah  said :  "  We  remain  their  guardians  whether 
they  be  young  or  mature  until  they  make  clear  to  us  that 
they  are  going  to  turn  away  from  the  truth."  When  they 
differed  over  this,  each  one  of  them  threw  off  the  respon- 
sibility of  the  sin  of  the  other,  and  their  respective  followers 
were  divided  into  two  sects.  The  sects  of  the  'Ajaridah  we 
have  already  mentioned.  The  Tha'alibah  subdivided  into 
six  sects.  One  of  them  held  to  the  Imamate  of  Tha'labah 
and  accepted  no  other  Imam  after  him,  unmoved  by  the  fact 
that  there  arose  among  them  different  opinions  held  by  the 
'Akhnasiyah  and  the  Ma'badlyah. 

1  Shahrastani,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  147  gives  Tha'labah  ibn-'Amir  instead 
of  ibn-Mashkan. 

102 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

13.  Concerning  the  Ma'badlyah.  The  second  sect  was  81 
the  Ma'badiyah,  who  claimed  that  the  Imam  succeeding  the 
Tha'alibah  was  one  of  their  people  by  the  name  of  Ma'bad.1 
This  man  disagreed  with  all  of  the  Tha'alibah  over  the 
question  of  taking  alms  from,  and  giving  alms  to  slaves. 
He  condemned  as  unbelievers  those  who  did  not  accept  this 
view,  while  the  rest  of  the  Tha'alibah  condemned  him  as 
unbelieving  because  he  held  this  view. 

14.  Concerning  the  Akhnasiyah.  The  third  sect  was  the 
Akhnasiyah,  followers  of  one  of  their  people  who  was 
known  as  al-Akhnas.  At  the  beginning  of  his  career  he 
agreed  with  the  views  of  the  Tha'alibah  concerning  the 
guardianship  of  children.  But  later  he  withdrew  from  them, 
saying:  "  We  must  oppose  all  those  living  in  a  land  where 
dissembling  is  sanctioned.2  Only  when  the  faith  of  the 
man  in  question  is  known  to  us  should  we  definitely  accept 
him.  And  likewise  only  when  his  heresy  is  definitely  known 
to  us  should  we  rid  ourselves  of  him."  He  forbade  murder 
and  theft  in  secret,  and  also  claimed  that  none  of  the  people 
of  the  Kiblah  should  begin  a  fight  without  being  specially 
called  for  it,  unless  the  enemy  is  personally  known.  In  this 
view  he  had  many  followers.  Indeed  he  was  rejected  by  the 
rest  of  the  Tha'alibah,  but  he  in  turn  rejected  them. 

15.  Concerning  the  Shaibcimyah.  The  fourth  sect  of  the 
Tha'alibah  is  the  Shaibaniyah,  followers  of  Shaiban  ibn- 
Salamah  al-Khariji,  who  separated  from  the  rest  in  the 
days  of  abu-Muslim,  the  founder  of  the  dynasty  of  the 
banu-al-' Abbas.  He  helped  abu-Muslim  in  his  wars  against 
his  enemies,  and  in  addition  held  the  doctrine  of  the  likeness 
of  Allah  to  his  creatures.  The  rest  of  the  Tha'alibah,  to- 
gether with  the  Sunnites,  condemned  his  view  as  anthropo- 


1  Ibid.,  p.  148. 

2  See  note  1,  p.  no. 


103 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

morphia  In  addition  all  of  the  Khawarij  condemned  him 
for  upholding  abu-Muslim.  Those  of  the  Tha'alibah  who 
condemned  him  were  called  the  Ziyadiyah,  the  followers  of 
Ziyad  ibn-'Abd-al-Rahman.1  The  Shaibaniyah  claim  that 
82  Shaiban  repented  of  his  sins,  while  the  Ziyadiyah  said  that 
among  his  sins  was  that  of  doing  violence  to  the  worship- 
pers of  Allah,  a  crime  for  which  repentance  could  not  atone. 
However,  he  went  on  aiding  abu-Muslim  in  fighting  the 
Tha'alibah,  just  as  he  had  aided  him  in  fighting  the  banu- 
'Umaiyah. 

16.  Concerning  the  RashTdiyah.  The  fifth  sect  of  the 
Tha'alibah  is  called  Rashidiyah  after  a  man  by  the  name  of 
Rashid.  Its  peculiar  belief  is  that  land  which  is  watered  by 
springs  and  flowing  rivers  should  pay  half  the  tithe,  the 
complete  tithe  being  paid  on  land  watered  by  rain  only. 
Ziyad  ibn-'Abd-al-Rahman  differed  from  them,  saying  that 
land  watered  by  springs  and  flowing  rivers  should  also  pay 
full  tithe. 

17.  Concerning  the  Mukarramlyah.  The  sixth  division 
of  the  Tha'alibah  is  called  the  Mukarramlyah,  followers  of 
abu-Mukarram.2  They  claim  that  he  who  neglects  prayer  is 
an  unbeliever,  not  because  of  the  fact  of  his  neglect  of  prayer, 
but  because  of  his  ignorance  of  Allah.  They  claimed,  more- 
over, that  all  sinners  were  ignorant  of  Allah,  and  that  ignor- 
ance constitutes  unbelief.  They  also  held  to  the  doctrine 
that  Allah's  enmity  and  friendship  depend  on  a  man's  relig- 
ious attitude  at  death.  Such  are  the  sects  of  the  Tha'alibah 
and  their  views. 

18.  Concerning  the  Ibadlyah  and  their  sects.  The  Iba- 
dlyah, although  divided  over  many  things,  agreed  in  ac- 
knowledging the   Imamate   of    'Abdallah   ibn-Ibad.3     An- 


104 


1  Ibid., 

P- 

149. 

2    but.. 

P- 

150. 

'Ibid., 

P- 

151. 

THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 


other  point  in  which  they  agreed  was  the  view  that  the  un- 
believers of  this  community,  i.  e.  those  of  their  community 
who  differed  from  them,  were  both  free  from  polytheism, 
and  at  the  same  time  wanting  in  faith,  thus  being  neither 
believers  nor  polytheists,  but  unbelievers.  They  accepted  the 
testimony  of  such  however,  and  secretly  forbade  the  shed- 
ding of  their  blood,  although  publicly  claimed  it  was  lawful.  83 
They  also  countenanced  intermarriage  with  them,  as  well 
as  inheritance  from  them.  In  this  they  claimed  that  such 
persons  are  fighting  for  Allah  and  his  Prophet,  although  they 
are  not  true  confessors  of  Islam.  In  addition,  they  consid- 
ered some  kinds  of  property  owned  by  those  who  disagree 
with  them  as  permissible  to  seize,  while  other  kinds,  for  ex- 
ample horses  and  arms,  are  forbidden.  As  for  their  gold 
and  silver,  they  considered  it  best  to  return  it  to  its  owners, 
when  it  is  seized. 

There  were  four  definite  differences  which  split  up  the 
Ibadiyah.  The  names  of  the  groups  adhering  to  the  differ- 
ent views  were:  the  Hafsiyah,  the  Harithiyah,  the  Yazl- 
diyah,  and  the  "  Ashab  Ta'ah  "  (i  e.  those  who  do  pious 
deeds  without  the  intention  of  pleasing  Allah).  Among 
these  the  Yazidiyah  belong  to  the  Ghulat,  because  they  be- 
lieve in  the  abrogation  of  the  divine  law  of  Islam  at  the  end 
of  time.  This  we  will  mention  later  in  the  chapter  on  the 
Ghulat  sects  connected  with  Islam.  In  this  chapter,  how- 
ever, we  will  mention  only  the  Hafsiyah,  the  Harithiyah, 
and  the  Ashab  Ta'ah  (those  who  do  pious  deeds  without  the 
intention  of  pleasing  Allah). 

19.  Concerning  the  Hafsiyah.  This  sect  acknowledges 
the  Imamate  of  Hafs  ibn-abi-1-Mikdam,1  who  was  the  one 
who  held  that  there  was  but  one  thing  that  lay  between 
polytheism  and  belief,  namely,  the  knowledge  of  Allah  alone. 


Ibid.,  p.  153. 

105 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Accordingly,  the  man  who  knew  Allah,  but  later  came  to 
disbelieve  in  other  matters,  such  as  his  Prophet,  paradise, 
hell,  forbidden  deeds,  killing  oneself,  or  the  permission  of 
adultery  and  the  rest  of  the  forbidden  sins,  that  man  is  an 
unbeliever,  but  is  nevertheless  free  from  polytheism.  He, 
on  the  other  hand,  who  is  ignorant  of  Allah,  and  denies 
him,  is  a  polytheist.  Their  explanation  of  the  case  of 
'Uthman  ibn-'Affan  was  similar  to  that  of  al-Rafidah  in 
regard  to  abu-Bakr  and  'Umar.  They  also  claim  that  'AH 
was  the  one  to  whom  Allah  referred  when  he  revealed  the 
following:  "A  man  there  is  who  surpriseth  thee  by  his  dis- 
course concerning  this  present  life.  He  taketh  God  to  wit- 
ness what  is  in  his  heart;  yet  is  he  the  most  zealous  in 
84  opposing  thee  "  (Surah  2,  v.  200)  ;  while  'Abd-al-Rahman 
ibn-Muljim  was  the  one  to  whom  Allah  referred  when  he 
said,  "  A  man  too  there  is  who  sells  his  very  self  out  of 
desire  to  please  God."  (Surah  2,  v.  203.)  In  addition  to 
all  this  they  went  on  to  say  that  belief  in  the  books  and  the 
prophets  is  connected  with  belief  in  the  unity  of  Allah. 
And  any  man  disagreeing  with  this  was  a  polytheist.  This 
last  view  is  contradictory  to  their  first  view  that  the  differ- 
ence between  polytheism  and  unbelief  lies  in  the  knowledge 
of  Allah  alone,  and  that  he  who  knew  Allah  is  free  from 
polytheism  even  if  he  rejects  the  rest  of  the  beliefs,  i.  e.  the 
Prophet,  paradise  and  hell.  Their  views  thus  became  con- 
tradictory in  this  matter. 

20.  Concerning  the  Harithlyah,  These  are  the  followers 
of  Harith  ibn-Mazid  al-Ibadi.1  It  was  they  who  agreed 
with  the  Mu'tazilah  in  regard  to  fate.  They  claimed  also 
that  ability  precedes  any  deed,  a  view  for  which  the  rest  of 
the  Ibadiyah  condemned  them,  because  it  was  contrary  to 
the  views  of  the  Sunnites  to  the  effect  that  Allah  creates  the 

1  Ibid.,  p.  153. 

106 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

deeds  of  his  servants,  and  that  ability  comes  only  in  con- 
junction with  the  deed.  The  Harithiyah  claimed  that  the 
only  Imams  they  had  had  since  the  first  Muhakkimah  were 
'Abdallah  ibn-Ibadi  and  that  after  him  came  Harith  ibn- 
Mazld  al-Ibadi. 

21.  Concerning   the  Ashab   Ta'ah  who  do  pious  deeds 
without  the  intention  of  pleasing  Allah.     This  sect  claims 
that  it  is  true  that  there  exist  many  acts  of  obedience  [vir- 
tues] that  are  not  meant  to  please  Allah.     Abu-al-Hudhail 
(see  below)  and  his  followers  among  the  Kadanyah  also 
asserted  this;  but  our  followers  said  that  this  is  true  only 
in  one  case,  that  is,  during  the  first  intuition  of  man.    When 
a  man  is  guided  *  by  such  intuition,  he  is  obedient  to  Allah   85 
in  his  deed,  even  though  he  had  not  intended  to  draw  near 
to  Allah  by  performing  it,  because  it  is  impossible  for  him 
to  draw  near  to  Allah  before  he  really  knows  him.     But 
when  he  has  once  learned  to  know  Allah,  then,  after  this 
knowledge,  any  obedience  on  his  part  to  Allah  is  not  ac- 
counted to  him  as  righteousness,  unless  he  intended  thereby 
to  draw  near  to  Allah.  All  the  Ibadiyah,  however,  claim 
that  the  houses  of  their  opponents  among  the  people  of 
Meccah  are  places  where  the  unity  of  Allah  is  proclaimed, 
with  the  exception  of  the  camp  of  the  sultan,  for  his  is  the 
abode  of  a  tyrant.     Over  hypocrisy  they  differed  in  three 
ways,  one  sect  saying  that  hypocrisy  is  not  included  either  in 
polytheism  or  in  faith.    As  their  reason  they  gave  the  words 
of  Allah  on  hypocrites :  "  Wavering  between  the  one  and  the 
other,  belonging  neither  to  these  nor  to  those."     (Surah  4? 
v.  142.)     Another  sect  said:  "All  hypocrisy  is  polytheism, 
because  it  is  opposed  to  unity."    The  third  sect  said :  "  We 
do  not  separate  the  word  '  hypocrisy  '  from  its  proper  usage, 
nor  do  we  call  any  people  hypocrites,  except  those  whom 

1  Read  istadall  and  not  istadhall. 

107 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Allah  has  called  hypocrites."  Those  of  them  who  said  that 
the  hypocrite  is  not  a  polytheist,  claimed  that  those  who 
were  hypocrites  in  the  time  of  the  prophet  of  Allah  were 
unitarians,  and  at  the  same  time  major  sinners;  thus  being 
unbelievers,  even  though  they  did  not  come  within  the 
category  of  polytheists, 

'Abd-al-Kahir  states:  "  After  all  we  have  related  about 
them,  (we  see  that)  the  peculiarity  of  their  views  sets  them 
apart  from  the  rest.  Among  these  peculiarities  are  those 
held  by  the  party  which  claims  that  there  was  no  proof  for 
mankind  of  the  unity  of  Allah  and  his  divine  and  other 
attributes,  except  through  information,  or  that  which  takes 
its  place  along  the  line  of  signs  and  suggestions."  An- 
other party  said  that  the  law  and  the  commands  of  Islam 
are  binding  on  whomever  enters  the  religion  of  Islam, 
whether  or  not  he  has  heard  or  known  them.  The  rest  of 
86  this  sect  say  a  man  does  not  sin  in  doing  something  about 
which  he  knows  nothing,  except  when  the  proof  [of  its  sin- 
fulness] has  been  given  him.  Still  others  say  it  is  possible 
for  Allah  to  send  to  his  creatures  a  prophet  with  no  sign 
to  prove  his  veracity.  Others,  however,  contend  that  who- 
ever attains  the  knowledge  that  Allah  has  forbidden  wine, 
or  that  he  has  caused  the  Kiblah  to  be  changed,  must  be 
certain  whether  the  one  who  informs  him  of  this  is  a  be- 
liever or  an  unbeliever.  Moreover,  it  is  incumbent  upon 
him  to  know  this  through  information,1  although  he  need 
not  necessarily  know  that  this  has  come  to  him  through  in- 
formation. The  view  of  still  others  is  that  going  on  foot 
to  prayer,  or  riding  or  traveling  to  the  Hajj  or  any  of  the 
means  which  help  to  fulfil  that  which  is  required,  are  of  no 
account.  What  is  incumbent  is  the  doing  of  the  deed,  re- 
gardless of  the  means  used  in  its  attainment.     All  parties 

1  For  definition  of  information  in  this  sense  see  Lane  on  khabar  as 
contrasted  with  Hadith. 

108 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

agree  that  it  is  right  to  ask  anyone  who  differs  from  them 
with  regard  to  the  text  of  the  Koran  or  its  interpretation, 
to  return  to  their  way  of  thinking.     And  if  such  a  person 
does  recant,  it  is  well;  if  not,  he  must  be  killed— it  being 
immaterial  whether   this   difference  related  to  something 
about  which  he  was  ignorant,  or  to  something  about  which 
he  was  not  ignorant.     They  also  said  that  he  who  commits 
adultery  or  steals  should  be  assigned  the  legal  punishment 
and  then  given  a  chance  to  repent.     If  he  repents,  it  is  all 
right;  if  not,  he  must  be  put  to  death.    They  said  also  that 
the  world  will  pass  away  when  Allah  has  caused  the  people 
who  have  observed  the  law  to  disappear,  this  being  possible 
because  he  created  it  only  for  them.    The  Ibadlyah  accepted 
the  possibility  of  conflicting  ordinances  existing  over  one 
and  the  same  thing.     For  example,  in  the  case  of  a  man 
who  goes  into  a  sown  field  without  the  permission  of  the 
owner,  this  would  be  breaking  a  commandment;  but  accord- 
ing to  another  command,  Allah  has  forbidden  his  going  out 
of  the  field,  because  that  would  be  harmful  to  the  seed, 
which  he  has  been  commanded  to  plant.     They  said,  more- 
over, the  fleer  in  war  is  not  (to  be)  pursued,  if  he  is  one  of    87 
the  people  of  the  Kiblah,  and  is  a  believer  in  the  unity  of 
Allah.    On  the  other  hand,  we  receive  no  women  and  slaves 
from  them.     They  consider  it  permissible  to  kill  anthropo- 
morphists  and  to  pursue  those  who  flee,  as  well  as  to  seize 
their  women  and  children  as  prisoners.    They  held  that  this 
was  what  abu-Bakr  did  to  apostates. 

There  was  a  man  of  the  Ibadlyah  known  as  Ibrahim, 
who  invited  some  of  the  members  of  his  sect  to  his  dwelling, 
and  gave  one  of  his  slaves,  who  belonged  to  the  same  sect, 
an  order.  When  she  delayed  over  it,  he  swore  he  would 
sell  her  to  the  Arabs,  but  one  of  the  men  whose  name  was 
Maimun,  not  the  leader  of  the  Maimumyah  among  the 
'Ajaridah,  said  to  him :  "  How  wilt  thou  sell  a  believing 

109 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

slave  to  an  unbeliever?"  And  Ibrahim  said  to  him  :  "Allah 
has  permitted  such  a  sale,  and  the  followers  of  our  sect  who 
passed  before  us  have  also  always  permitted  it."  Maimun 
left  the  sect,  but  the  rest  were  uncertain  about  it,  so  they 
wrote  to  their  'Ulamas,  who  answered  that  such  a  sale  was 
permissible,  and  that  Maimun  should  be  brought  to  repent- 
ance, as  well  as  those  who  were  in  doubt  concerning  the 
action  of  Ibrahim.  The  result  of  all  this  was  that  three 
sects  arose,  the  Ibrahimiyah,  the  Maimuniyah,  and  the 
Wakifah.  Owing  to  the  question  of  the  legality  of  this 
sale,  Ibrahim  gathered  quite  a  following,  who  came  to  be 
known  as  the  Dahhakiyah.  This  group  permitted  the  mar- 
riage of  a  Moslem  woman  to  an  unbeliever  in  a  country 
where  dissembling  is  sanctioned.1  But  in  the  case  of  those 
who  are  in  a  country  where  their  own  sect  is  in  the  ascend- 
ance, this  is  not  permitted.  Some  were  uncertain  over 
this  question,  saying  about  the  wife :  "If  she  dies  we  will 
not  say  prayers  over  her,  nor  will  we  accept  her  inheritance, 
because  we  do  not  know  what  her  legal  condition  is." 

After  the  Ibrahimiyah,  there  arose  a  party  called  the 
Baihasiyah,  followers  of  abu-Baihas  Haisam  ibn-'Amir.2 
88  These  say  that  Maimun  was  an  unbeliever,  because  he  for- 
bade the  sale  of  a  woman  in  a  region  where  dissembling  is 
sanctioned,  and  which  is  inhabited  by  the  unbelievers  of  our 
people.  The  Wakifah  were  heretics  because  they  did  not 
recognize  Maimun's  heresy  and  Ibrahim's  orthodoxy. 
Ibrahim,  on  the  other  hand,  was  a  heretic  because  he  did 
not  disclaim  the  Wakifah.  They  said :  "  The  reason  for 
this  is  because  uncertainty  exists  only  in  connection  with 
bodies ;  the  uncertainty  with  regard  to  a  judgment  can  occur 
only  where  no  one  agrees  with  it,  for  if  one  Moslem  agrees 
with  it,  he  who  is  present  cannot  help  knowing  him  who 

1  Goldziher,  Das  Prinsip  der  takijja  im  Islam,  Z.  D.  M.  G.,  vol.  lx,  p.  213. 

2  Shahrastanl,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  139 ;  vol.  ii,  p.  405. 

no 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

knows  the  truth  and  acts  on  it,  and  him  who  knows  the  un- 
truth and  acts  on  it."  Then  the  Baihasiyah  said :  "  We  do 
not  call  him  who  commits  a  sin  a  heretic  until  he  is  brought 
to  the  governor  and  punished,  so  that  before  he  is  brought 
to  the  governor,  we  call  him  neither  a  believer  nor  a  here- 
tic." Some  of  the  Baihasiyah  said :  "  When  the  Imam  be- 
comes an  unbeliever,  his  followers  also  become  unbeliev- 
ers." Others  said :  "All  drinks  are  originally  permissible. 
He,  therefore,  who  drinks  is  forgiven  everything  which  he 
does  when  drunk,  such  as  neglecting  prayer  and  scorning 
Allah.  He  can  neither  be  punished  nor  considered  a  heretic 
as  long  as  he  is  drunk."  Still  others  of  the  Baihasiyah, 
called  the  'Aufiyah,  said :  "  Drunkenness  is  heresy  if  dur- 
ing drunkenness  prayer  is  neglected,  or  a  similar  offense  is 
committed."  The  'Aufiyah  divided  off  from  the  Baihasiyah 
and  separated  into  two  sects.  One  sect  said:  "  We  repu- 
diate those  who  desert  us  after  having  left  home  and  joined 
us,  fighting  in  our  ranks."  The  other  sect  said :  "  No,  we 
would  keep  such  an  one,  because  he  would  then  be  return- 
ing to  a  state  that  was  legal  for  him  before  he  came  to  us." 
Both  sects  say  that  if  the  Imam  is  heretical,  his  followers, 
whether  present  or  absent,  are  also  heretical.  Besides  the 
Ibadiyah,  the  Baihasiyah  formed  the  subsects  which  we 
have  mentioned  in  the  Kitab  al-Milal  wa'l-Nihal.  This,  89 
therefore,  is  all  we  have  to  say  of  them  in  this  book. 

21.  Concerning  the  Sliabibiyah.  They  are  known  as  al- 
Shablblyah  because  they  owe  their  origin  to  Shabib  ibn- 
Yazid  al-Shaibani,  known  as  abu-1-Sahara.  They  were 
also  known  as  the  Salihiyah  after  Salih  ibn-Mishrah  al- 
Khariji.  Shabib  ibn-Yazid,  the  Kharijite,  was  one  of  the 
companions  of  Salih,  and  after  him  he  took  over  the  com- 
mand of  his  army.  The  reason  for  this  was  that  Salih  ibn- 
Mishrah  al-Tamimi  differed  from  the  Azarikah  by  claim- 
ing that  he  was  one  of  the  Sifriyah,  while  others  said  that  he 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

had  been  neither  a  Sifri  nor  one  of  the  Azarikah.  In  the 
days  when  Bishr  ibn-Marwan  was  governor  of  al-Irak 
under  his  brother  'Abd-al-Malik  ibn-Marwan,  Salih  rebelled 
against  him.  Bishr  sent  al-Harith  ibn-'Umair  to  fight  him. 
Al-Mawayini  says  that  Salih  rebelled  against  al-Hajjaj 
ibn-Yusuf,1  and  that  it  was  al-Hajjaj  who  sent  al-Harith 
ibn-'Umair  to  fight  him,  and  that  the  battle  between  the 
two  came  to  a  head  before  the  gate  of  Fort  Halula.  Salih, 
having  been  defeated  and  wounded,  took  to  flight,  and 
being  near  to  death  he  said  to  his  companions :  "  I  name 
Shabib  my  successor  over  you.  I  know  there  are  among 
you  some  who  are  more  learned  than  he,  but  he  is  a  brave 
man  in  the  opinion  of  your  enemies,  and  feared  by  them. 
He  among  you  who  is  learned,  let  him  help  him  with  his 
knowledge."  Therefore,  as  soon  as  he  died,  his  followers 
paid  allegiance  to  Shabib,  until  he  came  to  differ  with  Salih 
about  a  certain  thing,  i.  e.  he  and  some  of  his  followers 
countenanced  the  Imamate  of  one  of  their  women,  when 
she  took  a  prominent  place  in  their  affairs,  and  led  them  out 
against  their  opponents.  They  claimed,  moreover,  that 
90  Ghazalah,  the  mother  of  Shabib,  held  the  Imamate  after 
the  murder  of  Shabib,  until  she  was  killed.  This  they 
proved  by  the  fact  that  when  Shabib  entered  al-Kufah,  he 
made  his  mother  mount  the  pulpit  of  al-Kufah,  in  order  to 
preach.  The  historians  report  that  at  the  beginning  of  these 
affairs,  Shabib  went  to  Syria  and  came  to  Riih  ibn-Zinba' 2 
and  said  to  him :  "Ask  the  Amir  of  the  Faithful  to  assign  a 
stipend  for  me,  as  one  on  the  honor-roll ;  for  I  have  a  large 
following  among  the  banu-Shaiban."  So  Ruh  ibn-Zinba' 
asked  this  of  'Abd-al-Malik  ibn-Marwan.  But  the  latter 
replied :  "  I  do  not  know  this  man,  and  I  fear  that  he  is  a 

1  Tabarl,  ibid.,  vol.  iv,  pp.  7,  114  et  seq. 

2  Tabarl-De  Goeje,  vol.  ii,  pp.  424,  460,  461. 

112 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

Harurl."  l  So  Ruh  told  Shabib  that  'Abd-al-Malik  ibn- 
Marwan  denied  any  knowledge  of  him.  Shabib  replied : 
"  He  will  know  me  after  this." 

He  then  returned  to  the  banu-Shaiban,  and  collected  about 
a  thousand  men  from  among  the  Salihiyah-Khawarij,  with 
whom  he  took  possession  of  the  district  which  lay  between 
Kaskar2  and  al-Mada'in.  Al-Hajjaj  sent  'Ubaid  ibn-abi-1- 
Mukharik  al-Mutannabi  against  him  with  a  thousand  horse- 
men, whom  Shabib  defeated.  He  then  sent  against  him 
'Abd-al-Rahman  ibn-Muhammad  ibn-al-Ash'ath,  whom  Sha- 
bib also  defeated.  Then  he  sent  out  'Attab  ibn-Warka'  al- 
Tamimi,  whom  Shabib  killed.  This  went  on  for  two  years, 
Shabib  putting  to  flight  twenty  of  the  armies  of  al-Hajjaj. 
He  then  fell  upon  al-Kufah  in  the  night,  having  a  thousand 
of  the  Khawarij  with  him,  as  well  as  his  mother  Ghazalah  » 
and  his  wife  Jahziyah  with  two  hundred  Kharijite  women, 
who  were  armed  with  lances  and  girded  with  swords.  When 
he  surprised  al-Kufah  in  the  night,  he  attacked  the  main 
mosque,  killing  the  guard  of  the  mosque  and  those  praying 
in  it,  and  he  then  made  his  mother  Ghazalah  mount  the 
pulpit  to  preach.  Khuraim  ibn-Fatik  al-Asadi  says  about  91 
this :  l 

"  Ghazalah  used  the  sword  to  strike 
The  people  of  al-'Irakain  for  one  whole  year; 
She  went  as  high  as  al-'Irakain  with  an  army, 
She  therefore  caused  al-'Irakain  suffering." 

His  army  being  scattered,  al-Hajjaj  waited  in  his  house 

1  Qarurah  is  a  place  near  al-Kufah  where  the  Khawarij    opposing 
Ali  lived.    Tabarl-Zotenberg,  vol.  iii,  p.  683. 

2  De  Goeje,  ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  5,  territory  watered  by  the  Tigris  and 
Euphrates. 

3  Tabarl,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  892. 

4  Kitab  al-Agh&ni,  vol.  xxi,  pp.  13,  5.     In  vol.  x,  p.  85,  Khuraim  is  read 
Khusaim. 

"3 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

until  he  had  gathered  his  troops  around  him  in  the  morn- 
ing. In  the  meantime,  Shabib  led  his  companions  in  prayer 
in  the  mosque,  and  at  the  morning  prayer  he  read  the  Surah 
of  the  Cow  (Surah  2),  and  the  Surah  of  the  Family  of 
'Imran  (Surah  3).  It  was  just  at  that  point  that  al-Hajjaj 
came  upon  him  with  four  thousand  of  his  army,  and  the 
two  parties  fought  in  the  market  place  of  al-Kufah,  until 
the  companions  of  Shabib  were  killed,  and  Shabib  forced  to 
flee  to  al-Anbar,  with  those  who  remained  with  him.  Al- 
Hajjaj  sent  an  army  in  pursuit,  and  drove  Shabib  out  of 
al-Anbar,1  into  al-Ahwaz.  Al-Hajjaj  sent  Sufain  ibn-al- 
Abrad  al-Kalbi  with  three  thousand  men  in  pursuit  of  Sha- 
bib. Sufain  encamped  on  the  banks  of  al-Dujail  [Little 
Tigris],  while  Shabib  went  to  the  bridge  of  Dujail  to  cross 
over  to  him.  Sufain,  however,  commanded  his  followers 
to  cut  down  the  ropes  of  the  bridge.  The  bridge,  therefore, 
gave  way  and  Shabib  fell  into  the  water  with  his  horse. 
This  happened  while  he  was  repeating  Surah  6,  v.  96: 
"  This  is  predestined  (by  Allah),  the  mighty,  the  knowing." 
The  followers  of  Shabib  on  the  other  side  of  al-Dujail  then 
paid  allegiance  to  Ghazalah,  the  mother  of  Shabib.  But 
Sufain  ibn-Abrad  mended  the  bridge  and  crossed  with  his 
army  into  the  district  of  the  Khawari j ,  killing  most  of  them, 
including  Ghazalah,  the  mother  of  Shabib,  and  his  wife 
Jahizah,2  and  taking  prisoner  the  rest  of  the  followers  of 
Shabib.  He  also  commanded  the  divers  to  bring  the  body 
of  Shabib  out  of  the  water,  and  he  took  his  head  and  sent  it 
92  with  the  prisoners  to  al-Hajjaj.  When  the  prisoners  were 
brought  before  al-Hajjaj,  he  commanded  that  a  certain  man 
of  them  should  be  killed.     That  man  had  said  to  him: 

*De  Goeje,  ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  8. 

2<Abd  al-Kahir  gives  two  readings.    Jahizah  and  Jahstyah. 

114 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  KHARIJIYAH 

"  Hear  from  me  the  two  verses  with  which  I  will  end  my 
work."     Whereupon  he  began  reciting : 

"  I  will  take  refuge  with  Allah  from  'Amr  and  his  followers, 
And  from  'All  and  the  Companions  of  Siffln 
And  from  Mu'awiyah,  the  tyrant,  and  his  followers ; 
Bless  not,  O  Allah,  the  accursed  people !  " 

Not  only  this  man's  death,  but  the  death  of  many  others 
was  commanded.     The  rest  were  set  free. 

Says  'Abd-al-Kahir  to  the  Shabibiyah  of  the  Khawarij : 
"  It  might  be  said,  you  discountenanced  the  departure  of  the 
Mother  of  the  Faithful,  'A'ishah,  to  al-Basrah  with  her 
army,  of  which  each  member  was  forbidden  [in  marriage], 
because  in  the  Koran  she  is  the  mother  of  all  the  faithful; 
and  you  claimed  that  she  became  a  heretic  because  of  this; 
and  you  applied  to  her  the  words  of  Allah:  'And  abide  still 
in  your  houses.'  (Surah  33,  v.  3.)  Why  don't  you  apply 
this  verse  also  to  Ghazalah,  the  mother  of  Shabib,  and  so 
charge  her,  and  the  Kharijite  women  also,  with  heresy,  who 
went  to  fight  the  armies  of  al-Hajjaj?  Now,  if  you  con- 
sider their  action  permissible,  because  their  husbands,  chil- 
dren or  brothers  were  with  them,  then  you  should  take 
into  account  that  with  'A'ishah  there  were  her  brother  'Abd- 
al-Rahman,  and  her  nephew  'Abdallah  ibn-al-Zubair,  each 
one  of  whom  was  forbidden  to  her  [in  marriage].  Besides, 
all  Moslems  are  her  children,  and  therefore  all  are  forbidden 
to  her.  If,  then,  some  of  you  accept  the  Imamate  of  Ghaza- 
lah, so  that  her  Imamate  seems  proper,  why  do  you  not 
consider  'A'ishah's  act  permissible?"  Praise  be  to  Allah 
for  guarding  us  from  heresy. 

115 


CHAPTER  III 

The  Doctrines  of  the  Erring  Sects  among  the 
Mu'tazilite  KadarIyah 

We  have  already  mentioned  the  fact  that  the  Mu'tazilah 
were  divided  into  twenty  sects,  each  one  condemning  the 
other  as  unorthodox.  These  twenty  sects  are :  The  Wasil- 
ryah,  the  'Amrlyah,  the  Hudhaillyah,  the  Nazzamiyah,  the 
Aswariyah,  the  Mu'ammarlyah,  the  Iskaflyah,  the  Ja'far- 
lyah,  the  Bishriyah,  the  Murdariyah,1  the  Hishamlyah,  the 
Tamamlyah,  the  Jahizlyah,  the  Hayitiyah,  the  Himariyah, 
the  Khaiyatlyah,  and  the  followers  of  Salih  Kubbah,  the 
Muwaisiyah,  the  Shahhamlyah,  the  Ka'biyah,  the  Jubablyah, 
and  the  Bahshamiyah,  who  are  named  after  abu-Hashim 
ibn-al-Jubba'I.  This  makes  a  total  of  twenty-two  sects,  two 
sects  belonging  to  the  heretical  groups  of  the  Ghulat  Those 
we  will  mention  in  the  chapter  dealing  with  the  sects  of  the 
Ghulat,  they  being  the  Hayitiyah  and  the  Himariyah.  The 
other  twenty  are  pure  KadarIyah,  all  agreeing  in  certain 
heretical  doctrines,  e.  g.  the  common  denial  that  Allah  has 
eternal  qualities;  the  affirmation  that  Allah  has  neither 
knowledge,  nor  power,  nor  life,  nor  hearing,  nor  seeing, 
nor  any  eternal  attribute:  together  with  their  view  that 
94  Allah  never  had  a  name  or  an  attribute.  They  claim,  fur- 
thermore, that  it  is  impossible  for  Allah  to  see  with  his 
eyes.  They  say  that  he  himself  does  not  see,  nor  does 
anyone  see  him.    They  differ,  however,  over  the  question  as 

1  ShahrastanI,  ibid.,  gives  Mazddriyah,  but  Murdariyah   is   correct. 
Cf.  Goldziher's  article  in  Z.  D.  M.  G.,  vol.  lxv,  p.  363. 

116 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

to  whether  Allah  can  see  things  better  than  himself  or  not, 
some  saying  yes,  and  others  no.  But  they  agree  in  the  view 
that  the  Word  of  Allah  is  created  as  well  as  his  "thou  shalt" ; 
his  "thou  shalt  not"  and  his  revelation.  All  claim  that  the 
Word  of  Allah  has  a  beginning,  and  most  of  them  today  call 
his  Word  created.  They  also  agree  that  Allah  is  not  a  crea- 
tor of  the  paths  of  men,  nor  of  any  of  the  deeds  of  animals. 
They  hold,  on  the  other  hand,  however,  that  it  is  man  who 
determines  his  own  affairs,  without  any  interference  on  the 
part  of  Allah,  either  in  these  affairs  of  men  or  of  any  of 
the  deeds  of  animals.  It  is  because  of  this  view  that  the 
Moslems  call  them  Kadarlyah.1  Another  thing  in  which 
they  agree,  is  the  claim  that  the  sinner  within  the  Islamic 
religion  belongs  to  a  class  between  the  two  recognized 
classes,  i.  e.  that  he  is  a  sinner,  but  neither  a  believer,  nor 
an  unbeliever.  Because  of  this  the  Moslems  call  them 
Mu'tazilah,2  since  they  secede  from  the  views  of  the  com- 
munity as  a  whole. 

Furthermore,  they  agreed  in  the  view  that  nothing  in  the 
acts  of  his  servants,  which  Allah  did  not  command  or  for- 
bid, was  willed  by  him.  In  his  treatise,  al-Ka'bi 3  claimed 
that  the  Mu'tazilah  agreed  that  Allah  is  a  thing  unlike  ordi- 
nary things,  that  he  is  the  creator  of  bodies  and  accidents, 
and  everything  which  he  created  he  created  from  nothing, 
and  that  all  believers  perform  their  acts  according  to  what 
Allah  preordains  concerning  them.  He  also  says  that  they  95 
agree  that  those  who  commit  major  sins  are  not  forgiven 
unless  they  repent.  In  these  last  assertions  of  al-Ka'bi  there 
are  several  mistakes  with  regard  to  his  co-believers,  He 
asserts,  for  example,  that  the  Mu'tazilah  agree  that  Allah 
is  a  thing  unlike  other  things.    As  a  matter  of  fact,  accord- 

1  Kadara  means  to  determine. 
2 I'tazala  means  to  secede. 

3  Cf.  above  (pp.  27).    This  is  the  same  makalah  mentioned  later. 

117 


96 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

ing  to  all  the  Mu'tazilah,  the  attribute  of  Allah  does  not 
belong  to  Allah  alone.  Al-Jubba'I  and  his  son  abu-Hashim  3 
have  said :  "  All  creative  power  is  a  thing  unlike  other 
things."  They  therefore  do  not  limit  this  praise  to  their 
lord  alone.  Secondly,  he  is  mistaken  in  his  report  that  all 
the  Mu'tazilah  agree  that  Allah  is  the  creator  of  bodies  and 
of  accidents,  for  it  is  known  that  the  most  determined  of 
the  Mu'tazilah  exclude  all  accidents.  Mu'ammar,  among 
them,  claims  that  Allah  created  none  of  the  accidents;  that 
derived  accidents  have  no  creator.  How,  then,  can  his 
claim  be  true  that  the  Mu'tazilah  agree  that  Allah  is  the 
creator  of  bodies  and  of  accidents,  since  some  of  them 
ignore  the  existence  of  accidents,  others  assert  their  exist- 
ence, claiming,  however,  that  Allah  did  not  create  any  of 
them,  while  others  hold  that  derived  accidents,  which  arise 
later  [after  creation] ,  are  accidents  which  have  no  creator. 
Al-Ka'bi,  with  the  rest  of  the  Mu'tazilah,  says  that  Allah 
did  not  create  the  deeds  of  his  worshipers.  According  to 
those  believing  in  accidents,  such  deeds  are  accidents.  Al- 
Ka'bfs  mistake  in  this  matter,  with  regard  to  his  compan- 
ions, for  example,  that  the  Mu'tazilah  were  agreed  over  the 
view  that  Allah  created  what  he  created  from  nothing,  is 
therefore  an  accident.  How  could  they  have  been  agreed 
about  this  ?  Al-Ka'bi  and  the  rest  of  the  Mu'tazilah,  with 
the  exception  of  al-Salihi,2  claim  that  all  occurrences  were 
things  before  their  occurrence.  The  Basri  men  among  them 
claim  that  substances  and  accidents  were  substances  and 
accidents  and  things  in  their  state  of  non-existence.  The 
correct  conclusion  in  this  matter  is  that  Allah  creates  one 
thing  from  another ;  the  view  that  he  creates  a  thing  from 
nothing  being  true  only  according  to  the  principle  of  the 
Sifatiyah,  our  co-believers,  who  deny  the  existence  of  un- 


1  Cf.  below  under  Bahshamlyah. 

2  Horten,  ibid.,  p.  305. 


118 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

real  things.    As  to  the  claim  that  the  Mu'tazilah  agree  that 
the  faithful  perform  their  acts  as  Allah  has  preordained 
them,  this  is  a  mistake  on  his   [al-Ka'bfs]   part,  beecause 
Mu'ammar,1  who  was  one  of  them,  claimed  that  power  is 
the  act  of  a  substance  that  is  powerful,  and  not  an  act  of 
Allah.     The  Asamm,  among  them,  however,  deny  the  sub- 
stance of  power  because  they  deny  all  accidents.     In  the 
same  way  his  claim  that  the  Mu'tazilah  agree  that  Allah 
does  not  forgive  major  sinners  who  have  repented,  is  an 
error  on  his  part  concerning  them,  for  three  of  their  sheikhs 
who  agreed  with  the  Wakif  lyah  as  to  the  punishments  which 
threatened  major  sinners,  Muhammad  ibn-Shabib  al-Basrl, 
al-Salihi,  and  al-Khalidi  considered  it  sometimes  permis- 
sible for  Allah  to  forgive  such  sins,  even  without  repent- 
ance.    In  regard  to  what  we  have  mentioned  about  the 
Mu'tazilah,  al-Ka'bi  has  made  a  mistake.     The  Mu'tazilah 
agree  in  the  matters  we  referred  to.    As  to  the  matters  over 
which  they  differ  among  themselves,  those  we  shall  men- 
tion in  the  section  on  their  sects,  please  Allah. 

i.  Concerning  the  Wdsillyah  from  among  them.  These 
are  the  followers  of  Wasil  ibn-'Ata  al-Ghazza,2  the  head 
of  the  Mu'tazilah,  and  their  leader  in  their  heresy  after 
Ma'bad  al- Julian!  and  Ghailan  al-Dimashki.3  Wasil  was  gy 
one  of  those  who  paid  frequent  visits  to  al-Hasan  al-Basri 4 
at  the  time  of  the  rebellion  of  the  Azarikah.  At  that  time 
the  people  were  divided  into  sects  over  the  question  of  sin- 
ners within  the  religion  of  Islam.  One  sect  claimed  that 
all  who  commit  sin,  major  or  minor,  are  polytheists.     This 

1  Cf.  below  under  Mu'ammariyah. 

2  Horten,  ibid.,  p.  125.     Shahrastani,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  44-     Ibn-Khallikan, 
ibid.,  vol.  iii,  p.  642. 

'Leaders  of  less  important  sects,  preceding  the  definite  split  by  the 
Mu'tazilah. 
4  Horten,  ibid.,  p.  120.     Ibn-Khallikan,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  3/0- 

119 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

was  the  view  of  the  Azarikah  among  the  Khawarij,  who 
claimed  that  children  of  polytheists  were  polytheists.  They 
therefore  sanctioned  the  killing  of  the  children  of  those  who 
differed  from  them,  as  well  as  the  killing  of  their  women, 
whether  they  belonged  to  the  religion  of  Islam  or  not. 

The  Sifriyah  among  the  Khawarij  regarded  sinners  as 
unbelievers  and  polytheists,  agreeing  with  the  Azarikah  in 
this,  although  they  disagreed  with  them  over  the  killing  of 
the  children. 

The  Najadat  among  the  Khawarij  held  that  a  sinner 
upon  whose  condemnation  the  community  had  agreed,  is  an 
unbeliever  and  a  polytheist,  but  that  the  sinner  over  whom 
the  community  has  differed  should  be  judged  according  to 
the  decision  of  the  canonists  in  this  matter.  Furthermore, 
they  forgave  the  sinner  so  long  as  he  did  not  know  that  the 
sin  is  forbidden,  being  in  ignorance  of  this  fact,  until  the 
testimony  is  brought  against  him  with  respect  to  it. 

The  Ibadiyah  of  the  Khawarij  claimed  that  the  sinner 
who  commits  a  sin  against  which  he  has  been  warned,  know- 
ing of  the  existence  of  Allah  and  what  has  been  revealed 
from  him,  is  an  unbeliever  in  that  he  does  not  recognize  the 
blessings  of  Allah ;  but  his  heresy  is  not  the  same  as  that  of 
the  polytheist.  Some  of  the  people  of  this  age  went  so  far 
as  to  claim  that  those  who  commited  major  sins  in  this  com- 
munity were  atheists,  which  is  worse  than  being  unbelievers 
who  publicly  profess  their  unbelief. 

The  learned  followers  of  that  age  held  with  the  rest  of 
the  community,  that  he  within  the  community  who  commits 
98  a  major  sin  is  a  believer  owing  to  his  knowledge  of  the 
prophets  and  the  books  revealed  by  Allah ;  and  also  because 
of  his  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  all  that  comes  from  Allah 
is  truth.  He  commits  a  major  sin,  however,  even  though  his 
error  does  not  deprive  him  of  the  attributes  of  believer  and 
Islam.  To  this  fifth  view  conform  the  companions  (of  the 
Prophet)  in  the  early  community  and  their  followers. 

120 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

When  the  revolt  of  the  Azarikah  broke  out  in  al-Basrah 
and  al-Ahwaz,  and  the  people  came  to  differ  over  sinners  in 
the  five  ways  which  we  have  mentioned,  Wasil  ibn-'Ata  . 
seceded  from  the  views  of  all  of  the  preceding  sects,  claim-  \ 
ing  that  the  sinner  in  that  community  was  neither  a  believer,    • 
nor  an  unbeliever,  giving  to  this  error  an  intermediate  rank 
between  the  ranks  of  belief  and  unbelief.    When  al-Hasan 
al-Basri  heard  of  this  heresy  of  Wasil,  in  which  he  differed 
from  the  sects  preceding  him,  he  drove  him  out  of  his  audi- 
ence.    Wasil,  therefore,  took  his   stand  near  one  of  the 
columns  of  the  mosque  of  al-Basrah,  having  as  a  companion 
in  his  error  his  comrade  'Amr  ibn-'Ubaid  ibn-Bab,  as  a  slave 
bleats  for  his  mother  (text  not  clear).     So  on  that  day  it 
was  said  that  these  two  men  had  seceded  from  the  accepted 
view  of  the  community,  and  they  therefore  called  their  fol- 
lowers Mu'tazilah  [seceders].     The  two  then  publicly  pro- 
claimed their  heresy  about  this  intermediate  rank  of  sin. 
They  also  added  to  it  an  invitation  to  join  with  them  in  the 
view  of  the  Kadariyah  concerning  the  doctrine  of  Ma'bad 
al-Juhani.    It  was  that  occasion  which  gave  rise  to  the  say- 
ing that  Wasil,  with  his  heresy,  is  a  Kadarite.     Thus  the 
saying :  "  There  is  a  Kadari  in  every  unbeliever  "  was  orig- 
inated. 

Wasil  and  'Amr  agreed  with  the  Khawarij  that  he  who 
commits  a  major  sin  should  be  punished  in  hell,  but  they 
added  that  he  is  nevertheless  a  believer  in  the  unity  of  Allah, 
and  therefore  neither  a  polytheist  nor  an  unbeliever.  It  is  99 
owing  to  this  fact  that  the  Mu'tazilah  are  not  regarded  as 
fully  Khawarij,  because  the  Khawarij,  condemning  sinners 
to  eternal  punishment,  call  them  unbelievers,  and  take  up 
the  sword  against  them,  while  the  Mu'tazilah,  although 
condemning  them  to  eternal  punishment  in  hell,  do  not  dare 
to  call  them  unbelievers,  nor  to  fight  the  people  of  any  of 
their  sects,  among  those  whom  they  fight  for  differing  from 


121 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

them.  For  this  reason,  Ishak  ibn-Suwaid  al-'Adawi x  as- 
serted that  Wasil  and  'Amr  ibn-'Ubaid  belonged  to  the 
Khawarij,  because  they  [the  Khawarij]  agreed  regarding 
the  punishment  of  sinners.  Al-'Adawi  said  in  one  of  his 
poems : 

"  I  am  free  of  the  Khawarij,  nor  am  I  one  of  them, 
[Free]  from  al-Ghazzal  among  them,  and  ibn-Bab 
And  from  a  people  who,  when  they  mention  'All, 
Return  the  salute  to  the  clouds." 

Then  Wasil  developed  three  more  heresies  in  which  he 
disagreed  with  his  predecessors.  One  of  these  differences 
was  owing  to  the  fact  that  he  found  the  people  of  his  age 
differing  about  'AH  and  his  followers  and  Talhah  and  al- 
Zubair,  and  'A'ishah  and  the  rest  of  the  Followers  of  the 
Camel  The  Khawarij  claimed  that  Talhah  and  al-Zubair, 
and  'A'ishah  and  their  followers  in  the  Battle  of  the  Camel 
proved  their  disbelief  in  'AH  by  the  very  fact  that  they 
fought  him.  Moreover,  they  claimed  that  'All  was  in  the 
right  when  he  fought  the  Followers  of  the  Camel,  and  the 
followers  of  Mu'awiyah  at  Siffln,  but  erred  when  it  came 
to  the  matter  of  the  arbitration  (by  the  two  judges).  The 
orthodox,  however,  hold  that  both  sides  in  the  Battle  of  the 
Camel  were  true  Moslems.  They  say  that  'All  was  on  the 
right  side  when  he  fought  the  others,  and  that  the  Followers 
of  the  Camel  were  rebellious,  and  sinned  in  fighting  'All. 
Their  sin,  however,  cannot  be  called  heresy,  nor  transgres- 
sion, for  this  would  render  their  testimony  void,  whereas, 
ioo  as  a  matter  of  fact,  judgment  is  possible  on  the  testimony 
of  two  just  witnesses  from  either  side.  Wasil  differed  from 
both  of  these  sects  over  this  matter,  claiming  that  one  of  the 
two  sides  must  have  been  unjust,  though  not  of  itself;  and 
that  the  unjust  side  could  not  be  ascertained.  The  others 
contend  that  the  unjust  of  the  two  sides  might  have  been 

1  J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  43.     Quoted  in  Mas'udi,  vol.  ii,  p.  142. 

122 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

'All  and  his  followers,  i.  e.  al-Hasan,  al-Husain,  ibn-'Abbas, 
'Ammar  ibn-Yasir,  abti-Aiyub  al-Ansari  and  the  rest  who 
were  with  'All  at  the  Battle  of  the  Camel.  Wasil,  however, 
contends  that  the  unjust  of  the  two  sides  were  'A'ishah, 
Talhah,  al-Zubair,  and  the  rest  of  the  Followers  of  the 
Camel.  To  prove  this  he  said :  "  If  'All  and  Talhah,  or 
'All  and  al-Zubair,  or  a  man  of  the  followers  of  'AH  and  a 
man  of  the  Followers  of  the  Camel,  should  testify  before 
me  over  a  handful  of  parsley,  I  should  not  decide  by  the 
testimony  of  either  of  them,  because  of  my  knowledge  of 
the  fact  that  one  of  them  is  unjust,  although  not  of  himself. 
Likewise  I  would  not  decide  on  the  testimony  of  two  who 
were  cursing  each  other,  because  of  my  knowledge  of  the 
fact  that  one  of  them  was  unjust,  although  not  of  himself. 
But  if  two  men  of  one  of  the  sides  testified,  his  testimony 
would  be  accepted."  And  many  are  the  tears  shed  by  the 
eyes  of  the  outspoken  Rafidah  over  this  sinful  seceding  of 
the  Sheikh  al-Mu'tazilah  on  the  question  of  the  just  cause 
of  'AH  and  his  followers,  and  the  view  of  Wasil  about  the 
whole  matter.     As  we  have  said  in  one  of  our  poems  : 

"  A  view  which  is  not  connected  with  Wasil 1 — May  Allah   split  up 
their  unity  by  this." 

And  if  Allah  pleases,  we  will  give  the  end  of  this  poem  later. 

2.  Concerning  the  'Amriyah  among  them.  These  are  the 
followers  of  'Amr  ibn-'Ubaid  ibn-Bab,2  the  f reed-man  of  101 
the  banu-Tamim.  His  grandfather  was  one  of  the  captives 
of  Kabul.  The  innovations  and  heresies  in  religion  never 
appeared  except  from  the  children  of  captives,  as  is  men- 
tioned in  reports.  The  things  in  which  'Amr  agreed  with 
Wasil  were  the  following:    Predestination,  the  heresy  of 

1  Play  on  word  wdsil  which  means  connector. 
1  Shahrastanl,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  47.    Horten,  ibid.,  pp.  150-153. 

123 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Kadar,  the  wrong  view  about  having  an  intermediate  rank 
for  certain  errors,  and  the  rejection  of  the  testimony  of  two 
men,  one  of  whom  came  from  the  Followers  of  the  Camel 
and  the  other  from  the  followers  of  'AH.  To  these  heresies 
'Amr  added  the  following:  that  both  the  sides  fighting  in 
the  Battle  of  the  Camel  were  wrong.  Therefore,  while 
Wasil  rejected  the  testimony  of  two  men,  one  of  whom 
was  from  the  Followers  of  the  Camel,  and  the  other  from 
the  followers  of  'AH,  but  accepted  the  testimony  of  two  men 
from  the  same  side;  'Amr  claimed  that  such  a  testimony 
was  to  be  rejected  even  if  the  witnesses  came  from  the  same 
side,  because  he  considered  both  sides  to<  be  wrong.  After 
Wasil  and  'Amr,  the  Kadariyah  differed  over  the  same 
point.  Al-Nazzam  [see  below] ,  Mu'ammar  and  al-Jahiz  1 
agreed  with  Wasil  about  the  sides  at  the  Battle  of  the 
Camel.  But  Haushab  and  Hashim  al-x\ukas  said  that  the 
leaders  of  the  sect  are  safe,  but  the  followers  are  condemned 
to  hell. 

The  Sunnites  and  the  orthodox  held  that  'All  and  his  fol- 
lowers were  in  the  right  in  the  Battle  of  the  Camel,  claim- 
ing, furthermore,  that  al-Zubair  repented  on  that  day  and 
refrained  from  fighting.  When  he  reached  the  Wadi  al- 
Siba',  'Amr  ibn-Harmuz,2  taking  him  by  surprise,  killed 
him.  'All  gave  the  murderer  the  good  news  that  he  was 
going  to  hell.  Talhah  was  on  the  point  of  returning,  when 
Marwan  ibn-al-Hakam,  who  was  among  the  Followers  of 
the  Camel,  shot  an  arrow  at  him  and  killed  him.3  It  was 
'A'ishah  who  undertook  the  reconciliation  between  the  two 
102  parties.  The  banu-Azd  and  the  banu-Dabbah,  however,  had 
the  upper  hand  over  her,  so  that  she  failed.    Whoever  calls 

1  J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  56.     Brockelmann,  loc.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  152. 

2  Cf.  Tabari,  Zotenberg,  vol.  iii,  p.  660. 

3  Ibid.    J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  66. 

124 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

either  both  or  one  of  the  two  sides  unbelieving,  he,  rather 
than  they,  is  the  unbeliever.  Such  is  the  view  of  the  sun- 
nites,  praise  be  to  Allah  for  this. 

3.  Concerning  the  Hudhaillyah  from  among  them.  These 
are  the  followers  of  abu-al-Hudhail  Muhammad  ibn-al- 
Hudhail,  known  as  al-'Allaf.1  He  was  a  client  of  'Abd-al- 
Kais,  and  followed  the  example  of  most  children  of  cap- 
tives, among-  whom  the  majority  of  heresies  arose.  The  rest 
of  the  sects  of  Islam,  even  including  his  own  followers,  the 
Mu'tazilah,  branded  him  as  an  unbeliever.  The  man  known 
among  the  Mu'tazilah  by  the  name  of  al-Mirdad  wrote  a 
long  book  called  Concerning  the  Heresies  of  abu-al-Hudhail , 
and  Concerning  his  Peculiar  Forms  of  Unbelief.  Al- 
Jubba'i  also  wrote  a  book  refuting  the  belief  of  abu-al-Hud- 
hail concerning  what  is  created,  in  which  book  al-Jubba  I 
condemned  him  as  an  unbeliever.  Ja'far  ibn-Harb,2  well 
known  among  the  Mu'tazilah,  also  had  a  book  entitled  Re- 
buking abu-al-Hudhail.  This  book  points  out  the  unbelief 
of  abu-al-Hudhail,  and  also  mentions  the  fact  that  his  views 
tended  toward  the  views  of  the  Dahriyah. 

Among  the  heresies  of  abu-al-Hudhail  was  his  view  that 
the  preordination  of  Allah  can  cease,  at  which  time  Allah 
would  be  no  longer  omnipotent.  As  a  conclusion  from  this 
view,  he  claimed  that  the  bliss  of  the  people  of  paradise 
and  the  torture  of  the  people  in  hell  will  cease ;  the  people 
of  paradise  and  hell  remaining  in  a  state  of  lethargy,  unable 
to  do  anything.  Under  these  circumstances  Allah  would 
not  be  able  to  raise  a  man  from  the  dead,  nor  to  cause  the 
death  of  a  living  man,  nor  would  he  be  able  to  cause  the 
stationary  to  move,  nor  the  thing  in  motion  to  be  station- 

1  Shahrastani,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  48  et  seq.  Horten  calls  him  the  client  of 
the  'Abd-al-Kais  of  Basrah,  (p.  246  et  seq.)  Ibn-Khallikan,  ibid.,  vol. 
ii,  p.  667. 

3  Horten.  ibid.,  p.  251. 

125 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

ary,  nor  would  he  be  able  to  form  anything,  nor  to  annihi- 
late anything;  and  this  when  people  are  supposedly  sane! 
His  views  on  this  subject  are  worse  than  those  of  the  man 
who  believed  that  paradise  and  hell  would  cease,  as  did 
Jahm.  Jahm,  however,  although  believing  that  paradise 
and  hell  could  cease,  contended,  nevertheless,  that  after 
they  had  ceased,  Allah  would  be  able  to  create  their  like. 
This  abu-al-Hudhail  denied,  maintaining  that  after  the 
cessation  of  his  preordination,  his  God  had  no  ability  to  do 
anything.  Among  the  Mu'tazilah,  al-Mirdad  attacked  abu- 
al-Hudhail,  saying :  "  According  to  this,  it  would  follow 
that  if  the  friend  of  Allah  in  paradise  happened  to  be  offer- 
ing a  cup  to  someone  in  one  hand,  and  a  precious  gift  in  the 
other,  when  the  time  of  perpetual  stillness  fell  upon  all  he 
would  forever  have  to  remain  in  the  position  of  a  man 
being  crucified." 

Abu-al-Husain  al-Khaiyat *  offered  the  following  two 
pleas  as  an  apology  for  abu-al-Hudhail .  He  claimed  first 
that  abu-al-Hudhail  meant  that  when  the  preordination  of 
Allah  had  ceased,  he  would  gather  together  all  enjoyment 
for  the  people  of  paradise  and  they  would  then  remain  thus 
in  perpetual  rest.  Secondly,  he  claimed  that  abu-al-Hudhail 
had  maintained  these  views  for  the  sake  of  arguing  with 
his  opponents  over  their  investigations  of  his  answers. 
This  first  plea  of  abii-al-Husain,  in  defence  of  abu-al-Hu- 
dhail is,  however,  false  from  two  points  of  view.  First,  he 
held  that  two  opposite  enjoyments  can  unite  in  one  place  at 
one  time,  a  condition  which  is  as  impossible  as  the  union  of 
pleasure  and  pain  in  one  place.  Secondly,  if  this  plea  were 
I04  true,  it  would  necessarily  follow  that  the  condition  of  the 
people  of  paradise  after  Allah's  preordination  had  ceased 
would  be  better  than  their  condition  when  Allah  was  omni- 
potent.   As  regards  his  claim  that  abu-al-Hudhail  taught  the 

1  Shahrastanl,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  79. 
126 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

cessation  of  Allah's  preordination  only  in  order  to  encour- 
age argument,  it  is  refuted  by  the  fact  that  abu-al-Hudhail 
wrote  down  and  pointed  out  this  fact  in  his  book  called, 
Proofs  of  our  Assertions.    Besides,  in  his  book  known  as 
The  Book  of  the  Moulds,  he  gives  a  chapter  on  the  refuta- 
tion of  the  Dahriyah,  in  which  he  states  their  views  about 
believers  as  follows :  "  If  it  is  possible  to  have  a  motion 
after  every  motion,  and  so  on  to  the  end ;  and  an  occur- 
rence after  every  occurrence,  to  the  end;  then  is  not  the 
view  right  which  contends  that  there  is  no  motion  unpre- 
ceded  by  a  motion,  nor  an  occurrence  unpreceded  by  an 
occurrence?"     He  compromised  between  the  two,  however, 
saying:   "Just  as  an   occurrence   must  have   a  beginning 
which  is  not  preceded  by  another  occurrence,  so  there  must 
be  an  occurrence  at  the  end  which  is  not  followed  by  an 
occurrence."     It  is  for  this  reason  that  he  asserted  that 
Allah's  ability  to  preordain  ceased.     The  rest  of  the  theo- 
logians of  Islam,  however,  distinguished  between  the  pre- 
ceding occurrence  and  the  following  occurrence  by  charac- 
teristic distinctions  which  escaped  abu-al-Hudhail.     It  was, 
therefore,  because  of  his  ignorance  of  this  that  he  held  his 
view  on  the  cessation  of  Allah's  preordination.    These  evi- 
dent distinctions  we  have  mentioned  in  the  chapter  entitled. 
"  Evidences  on  the  fact  that  the  world  is  created,"  a  chap- 
ter which  is  to  be   found  in  our  books  treating  of  this 

subject. 

The  second  of  abu-al-Hudhail's  heresies  is  his  view  that 
the  people  of  the  next  world  are  forced  to  remain  as  they 
are;  the  people  of  paradise  being  forced  to  eat  and  drink 
and  intermarry,  while  the  people  of  hell  are  forced  to  [stick 
to]  their  views.  In  the  other  world,  no  creature  will  be 
allowed  to  perform  a  deed,  or  acquire  an  opinion.  Allah  is 
the  creator  of  their  views  and  their  actions,  and  all  else  that 
is  ascribed  to  them.    The  Kadariyah  then  blamed  Jahm  be- 

127 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

cause  of  his  view  that  the  servants  of  Allah  in  this  world 
are  forced  to  do  what  they  do  of  themselves,  thus  opposing 
our  sect  in  its  view  that  Allah  is  the  creator  of  that  which 
his  servants  acquire.  They  say  to  our  sect :  "  If  he  (Allah) 
is  the  creator  of  the  oppression  of  men,  then  he  must  be  an 
oppressor,  and  if  he  is  the  creator  of  the  lies  of  men,  then 
he  must  be  a  liar."  They  might  as  well  say  to  abu-al-Hud- 
hail :  "  If  you  say  that  Allah,  in  the  next  world,  creates  the 
falsehood  put  in  the  mouth  of  the  people  of  hell,  as  they 
say :  '  By  Allah,  our  Lord,  we  were  not  polytheists  '  ( Surah 
6,  v.  23),  then  he  must  be  a  liar,  according  to  the  view  that 
the  liar  is  the  one  who  creates  the  lie."  But  this  conclusion 
against  us  does  not  hold  good,  because  we  do  hot  hold  that 
the  oppressors  are  the  ones  who  created  the  oppression  and 
the  liar  the  lie.  On  the  contrary,  we  hold  that  the  oppressor 
is  the  one  from  whom  oppression  proceeds,  and  the  liar  the 
one  from  whom  the  lie  proceeds,  not  the  one  who  creates 
them.  Al-Khaiyat  offered  as  a  plea  for  this  innovation  of 
abu-al-Hudhail  the  following :  "  The  next  world  is  a  place 
of  rewards  and  not  a  place  of  responsibility;  therefore  if 
the  people  of  the  other  world  were  the  performers  of  their 
acts,  they  would  be  responsible  for  them,  and  their  reward 
106  and  punishment  would  be  in  another  world."  To  this  view 
of  al-Khaiyat  it  can  be  answered :  "  Do  you  agree  with,  or 
reject,  this  view  of  abu-al-Hudhail?  If  you  agree,  then  you 
say  about  it  the  same  thing  that  he  says,  which,  as  a  matter 
of  fact  differs  from  what  you  say.  But  if  you  reject  it,  then 
there  is  no  meaning  to  your  apology  for  a  thing  which  you 
yourself  condemn."  We,  however,  say  to  abu-al-Hudhail : 
"  Why  do  you  say  that  the  condition  of  the  people  of  the 
other  world  is  such  as  to  render  them  unable  to  perform 
deeds,  and  then  say  that  they  are  commanded  to  thank 
Allah  for  their  enjoyment,  but  not  commanded  to  pray,  nor 
to  give  alms,  nor  to  fast,  nor  are  they  to  cease  from  disobe- 

128 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

dience ;  and  yet  their  reward  for  gratitude  and  for  ceasing 
from  disobedience  was  to  be  eternal  beatitude  for  them? 
And  why  do  you  deny  that  those  who  are  in  the  next  world 
are  to  cease  from  disobedience,  and  yet  are  sinless;  as  we 
hold,  together  with  most  of  the  Shiites,  that  the  prophets 
were  forbidden  sin  in  this  world  already,  and  were  sinless ; 
just  as  the  angels  were  forbidden  sin,  and  were  sinless. 
For  this  reason  Allah  says  of  them :  '  They  disobey  not 
Allah  in  what  he  hath  commanded  them,  but  execute  his 
behests  '  "  (Surah  66,  v.  6). 

The  third  of  his  heresies  was  his  view  that  there  are  those 
who  are  obedient  without  the  intention  of  pleasing  Allah. 
This  is  also  the  view  of  the  Ibaclryah  among  the  Khawarij. 
He  claims  that  there  is  no  Dahri  in  the  world,  nor  any 
unbeliever,  who  is  not  obedient  to  Allah  in  many  things, 
although  disobeying  him  as  far  as  his  unbelief  is  concerned. 
The  Sunnites  and  the  orthodox,  however,  say :    Obedience 
to  Allah  from  one  who  does  not  know  him,  is  possible  only   107 
in  one  case,  i.  e.  where  there  is  speculation  and  deduction, 
which  are  necessary  before  attaining  a  knowledge  of  Allah. 
If  a  man  fulfils  this,  he  becomes  obedient  (that  is,  accept- 
able)   to  Allah,  because  Allah  has  commanded  him  this. 
And  this  is  true  even  if  his  aim  in  this  act  of  speculation 
may  not  be  to  draw  near  to  him  by  means  of  it.    No  other 
obedience  to  Allah  is  possible  for  him,  unless  its  aim  be  to 
draw  near  to  him  through  it,  because  it  is  possible  for  him 
to  draw  near  to  Allah  if  a  knowledge  of  Allah  is  attained 
by  this  first  speculation.    Without  this  contemplation,  how- 
ever, he  cannot  draw  near  to  Allah,  unless  by  some  chance 
he  knew  Allah  before  this  speculation  and  deduction.    Abu- 
al-Hudhail  supported  this  claim,  namely  that  it  is  possible 
to  obey  Allah  without  knowing  him,  by  saying  that  the  com- 
mands of  Allah  are  in  opposition  to  that  which  he  forbids, 
if,  therefore,  he  who  does  not  know  Allah,  neglected  all  his 

129 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

commands,  he  must  be  doing  everything  which  Allah  for- 
bids, and  in  the  same  manner  anyone  who  has  neglected  all 
obedience  must  be  committing  all  sins.  If  this  were  the  case 
a  Dahrl  would  be  a  Jew,  a  Christian,  a  Magian,  or  an  adher- 
ent of  some  other  unbelief.  If  the  Magian,  however,  rejects 
all  his  unbeliefs  except  his  Magianism,  he  would  still  be  dis- 
obeying by  his  Magianism,  which  we  know  was  forbidden 
him,  but  he  would  be  obeying  Allah  in  the  rejection  of  the 
rest  of  his  unbeliefs,  because  Allah  had  commanded  that 
they  be  rejected.  Verily  I  say  to  him,  that  the  commands  of 
Allah  and  his  prohibitions  are  not  what  you  think  them  to 
I08  be,  for  there  is  not  a  quality  of  obedience  without  a  quality 
in  opposition  to  it  and  to  each  other;  there  are  no  qualities 
of  belief  which  do  not  have  some  qualities  opposed  to  them 
and  at  the  same  time  to  each  other.  This  is  similar  to  the 
matter  of  standing  up  and  sitting  down,  bending  down  and 
lying  down.  A  man  may  not  be  sitting,  but  he  would  not 
then  necessarily  be  doing  all  its  opposites ;  he  would  not  be 
sitting,  however,  if  he  were  doing  one  of  its  opposites.  In 
like  manner,  a  man  is  outside  of  the  realm  of  obedience  to 
Allah  by  following  one  line  that  is  opposed  to  all  the  lines 
of  obedience,  because  that  kind  of  unbelief  is  opposed  to 
another  kind  of  unbelief,  just  as  it  is  opposed  to  the  rest  of 
the  lines  of  disobedience.  All  this  is  self-evident,  although 
abu-al-Hudhail  was  ignorant  of  it. 

The  fourth  of  his  heresies  is  his  view  that  Allah  is  not 
only  Allah  himself,  but  his  knowledge  is  himself,  and  his 
power  is  also  himself.  From  this  view  he  must  conclude 
that  Allah  is  knowledge  and  power.  But  if  he  is  knowledge 
and  power,  it  is  not  possible  that  he  should  be  knowing  and 
powerful ;  because  knowledge  cannot  be  knowing,  and  power 
cannot  be  powerful.  He  would  be  forced  to  draw  the  same 
conclusion  if  he  said  that  the  knowledge  of  Allah  is  Allah, 
and  his  power  is  Allah.     This  amounts  to  saying  that  his 

130 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

knowledge  is  his  power.  And  if  Allah's  knowledge  is  his 
power,  abu-al-Hudhail  must  conclude  that  all  that  is  known 
to  him  is  performed  by  his  power ;  the  Being  of  Allah,  there- 
fore, would  be  something  performed  by  his  power,  because 
it  is  known  by  him.  This  is  a  form  of  unbelief,  and  what 
leads  to  it  is  like  it. 

His  fifth  heresy  was  his  division  of  the  words  of  Allah 
into  that  which  needs  an  object  and  that  which  does  not 
need  an  object.1  He  claims  that  the  creative  word  of  Allah 
to  things,  "  Be,"  is  not  uttered  to  an  object.  The  rest  of 
his  words,  however,  had  a  beginning  in  some  corporeal  sub- 
stance. Yet  all  his  words,  according  to  abu-al-Hudhail,  are 
accidents.  Furthermore,  he  claimed  that  his  creative  word 
to  things,  "  Be,"  is  of  the  same  kind  as  the  word  of  man, 
"  Be."  He  thus  differentiated  between  two  accidents  which 
were  of  one  kind,  the  difference  [between  them]  being  that 
one  needs  an  object,  while  the  other  is  able  to  do  without  an 
object.  As  to  his  view  of  the  existence  of  a  decree  of  Allah 
without  an  object,  in  this  view  the  Basrah  Mu'tazilah  share, 
adding  to  it  that  this  word  [of  Allah]  is  the  same  as  a  de- 
cree of  ours  which  needs  an  object.  Consequently,  accord- 
ing to  him,  one  of  the  speakers  would  be  no  better  than  the 
other.2  Abu-al-Hudhail  has  no  right  to  assert  that  the  per- 
son saying  the  word  is  better  in  what  he  says  than  any  other, 
because  he  had  maintained  that,  in  the  other  world,  Allah 
creates  the  words  of  the  people  of  paradise  and  the  words 
of  the  people  of  hell,  but  he  is  not  the  one  who  speaks  their 
words.  Moreover,  his  theory  of  the  existence  of  a  word 
without  an  object  has  led  him  to  hold  it  correct  to  have 

1Mahall  is  literally  space.  In  this  case  it  means  the  place  of  origin, 
therefore  author  or  subject.  Cf.  Macdonald,  Muslim  Theology,  Juris- 
prudence and  Constitutional  Theory,  under  mahal. 

2  Horten,  ibid.,  p.  265.  This  sentence  is  ambiguous  in  the  Arabic. 
Horten  translates  it  very  freely.  It  probably  means  that  where  there 
is  no  subject  there  can  be  no  difference. 

131 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

words  without  a  speaker,  which  is  an  impossibility;  what 
leads  to  it  is  like  it. 

His  sixth  heresy  is  his  view  that  evidence  along  the  line 
of  reports   [of  individuals]   concerning  matters  which  are 
not  present  to  the  senses,  such  as  the  miracles  of  the  proph- 
ets, or  concerning  other  matters,  cannot  be  accepted  unless 
there  are  twenty  witnesses,  one  or  more  of  whom  is  from 
the  people  of  paradise  (Moslems).     Nor  would  he  neces- 
sarily accept  as  evidence  the  information  of  unbelievers  and 
impious,  even  if  their  number  should  amount  to  the  number 
required,  for  their  agreement  on  a  falsehood  is  inconceiv- 
able (mutawatir)  ,2  unless  one  of  them  is  a  man  of  paradise 
He  claimed,  moreover,  that  information  coming  from  less 
than  four  persons  is  not  to  be  accepted.    Information,  how- 
ever, coming  from  any  number  over  four  up  to  twenty  may 
be  accepted,  or  may  not.     The  attainment  of  knowledge, 
however,  from  this  information  is  certain  if   one  of  the 
no  twenty  is  a  man  of  paradise.     This  fact  about  the  twenty 
witnesses  he  proved  by  the  word  of  Allah :  "  Twenty  of 
you  who  persevere  will  conquer  two  hundred  idolaters" 
(Surah  8,  v.  66).     To  fight  these  two  hundred  idolaters, 
however,  was  not  legal  unless  the  twenty  were  evidence 
against  them.     Accordingly  the  information  of  one  person 
must  be  sufficient  for  proof  (that  a  thing  is  legal),  because 
in  this  case  one  person  had  to  fight  ten  unbelievers,  and  the 
fact  that  he  was  permitted  to  do  this  was  a  sign  one  was 
enough   as   evidence   against   them.      'Abd-al-Kahir    says : 
what  abu-al-Hudhail  meant  by  his  statement  that  twenty 
were  necessary  for  establishing  evidence,  if  one  of  them 
was  a  person  from  paradise,  is  intended  for  the  abolition  of 
the  use  of  the  information  in  the  legal  canons;  because  he 

1  The  mutaw&tir  is  the  report  of  a  people  numerically  indefinite,  whose 
agreement  upon  a  lie  is  inconceivable,  in  view  of  their  large  number. 
Cf.  Aghnides,  Mohammedan  Theories  of  Finance,  p.  40. 

132 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

meant  that  there  should  necessarily  be  among  them  one  of 
the  people  of  paradise  who  would  be,  according  to  his 
heresy,  a  Mu'tazilah  and  a  Kadarite,  and  therefore  agree 
with  him  in  his  heresy  about  fate  and  the  cessation  of  the 
power  of  Allah  to  preordain.  He  who  does  not  hold  this 
is  not,  from  his  point  of  view,  a  believer  nor  of  the  people 
of  paradise.  No  one  before  abu-al-Hudhail  held  a  heresy 
similar  to  his  heretical  view  with  regard  to  the  necessity  of 
having  twenty  witnesses. 

His  seventh  heresy  was  that  he  differentiated  between  the 
acts  of  the  heart  and  the  acts  of  the  organs  (of  the  body), 
by  saying  that  it  is  not  possible  for  the  acts  of  the  heart  to 
come  from  their  author,  if  he  has  no  power  over  them,  or  is 
dead.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  possible  for  the  acts  of  the 
organs  (of  the  body)  to  come  from  their  author  even  after 
his  death,  or  after  the  cessation  of  his  power,  in  case  he  is 
living.  He  went  on  to  say  that  the  dead  and  the  incapaci- 
tated can  be  the  authors  of  the  acts  of  the  organs,  through  in 
the  power  which  existed  before  death  or  incapacitation.  But 
al-Jubba  I  and  his  son  abu-Hashim  claim  that  the  acts  of  the 
heart  are  in  this  case  like  the  acts  of  the  organs  (of  the 
body),  in  that  it  is  possible  for  them  to  occur  when  the 
author  is  incapacitated,  and  even  after  the  power  to  produce 
the  act  has  ceased.  Thus  the  view  of  al-Jubba'i  and  his  son 
on  this  matter  is  worse  than  that  of  abu-al-Hudhail.  Abu- 
al-Hudhail,  however,  was  ahead  of  him  in  holding  that  it 
was  possible  for  both  the  dead  and  the  incapacitated  to  be 
authors  of  the  acts  of  the  organs.  In  this  heresy,  al-Jubba'i 
and  his  son  followed  abu-al-Hudhail's  example;  they  went 
further,  however,  and  concluded  that  it  was  possible  for  an 
incapacitated  man  to  be  the  author  of  the  acts  of  the  heart. 
The  founder  of  a  heresy,  however,  is  responsible  for  its 
sinfulness,  and  the  sinfulness  of  those  who  follow  it,  up  till 
the  day  of  judgment,  with  no  decrease  in  the  sinfulness  of 
those  who  choose  to  follow  it. 

i33 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

His  eighth  heresy  was  as  follows :  When  he  discovered 
that  men  differed  over  the  question  as  to  whether  knowledge 
is  natural  or  acquired,  he  rejected  both  of  these  views,  as 
well  as  the  view  that  what  is  known  through  the  senses  and 
through  intuition  is  natural  knowledge,  while  what  is  known 
through  induction  is  acquired  knowledge.  He  then  set  up 
for  himself  a  view  that  differed  from  all  those  of  his  prede- 
cessors, saying  that  knowledge  is  of  two  kinds,  the  one 
is  compulsory  knowledge,  such  as  the  knowledge  of  Allah, 
and  knowledge  of  the  evidence  leading  to  a  knowledge  of 
him ;  the  second  is  elective  and  acquired,  such  as  knowledge 
of  an  event  gained  through  the  sense,  or  through  syllogisms. 
From  this  he  drew  his  view  of  the  belated  character  of 
knowledge,  in  which  he  differed  from  the  rest  of  the  be- 
112  lievers.  According  to  this  view,  he  said  that  the  child  in  the 
second  stage  of  his  knowledge  of  himself  does  not  have  to 
bring  all  his  knowledge  of  unity  and  justice  together  with- 
out a  break,  but  he  must  bring  with  the  knowledge  of  the 
unity  and  justice  of  Allah  the  knowledge  of  all  that  Allah 
has  commanded  him  to  do.  The  result  is  that  if  he  does  not 
fulfil  the  requirement  of  this  second  stage  of  his  knowledge 
of  himself,  and  happens  to  die  in  the  third  stage,  he  dies  an 
infidel  and  an  enemy  to  Allah,  worthy  of  eternal  fire.  As 
to  the  knowledge  with  regard  to  information  which  can  be 
known  only  through  hearing,  such  knowledge  should  be 
attained  by  the  child  in  the  second  stage  of  hearing,  which 
constitutes  a  good  excuse  for  him.  Bishr  ibn-Mu'tamar,1 
however,  said  that  it  was  in  the  third  stage  that  the  child 
must  show  his  mental  knowledge,  when  in  the  third  stage 
of  his  knowledge  of  himself,  because  the  second  stage  is  a 
stage  of  speculation  and  of  thought,  so  that  if  he  does  not 
fulfil  this  in  the  third  stage,  and  happens  to  die  in  the  fourth 

1  Horten,  ibid.,  p.  161.     Shahrastanl,  ibid.,  vol.  i.  p.  65. 
134 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARlYAH 

stage,  he  will  then  be  an  enemy  of  Allah,  worthy  of  eternal 
fire.  Thus  there  are  a  few  fatalists  (Kadarites)  who  de- 
nied the  view  of  the  Azarikah  that  the  children  of  their  op- 
ponents were  condemned  to  hell,  and  denied  also  the  view 
of  those  who  held  that  the  children  of  unbelievers  are  con- 
demned to  hell;  these  same  men  claimed  that  the  children 
of  believers  who  died  in  the  third  or  fourth  stage  of  their 
knowledge  of  themselves,  were  condemned  to  eternal  fire, 
although  they  had  committed  no*  unblief . 

His  ninth  heresy  lay  in  the  fact  that  he  contended  that  it 
is  possible  for  a  body  having  parts  to  have  its  motion  con- 
fined to  certain  of  its  parts.  In  the  case  of  color,  he  held  TI^ 
that  this  was  not  possible.  The  rest  of  the  philosophers 
said  that  it  is  only  the  part  in  which  motion  arises  that  is 
the  thing  moving,  and  that  the  motion  does  not  apply  to  the 
combination  of  all  parts,  just  as  the  part  which  is  black,  is 
the  black  part;  blackness  not  extending  to  the  combination 
of  all  the  parts.  If,  however,  the  combination  of  all  the 
parts  moves,  there  is  motion  in  every  part,  just  as  if  the 
whole  is  black,  every  part  is  black. 

His  tenth  heresy  is  his  view  that  the  part  of  a  body  which 
cannot  be  divided,  cannot  have  a  color  of  itself,  when  it  is 
alone,  nor  can  it  be  seen  when  there  is  no  color  in  it.  This 
forces  the  conclusion  that  if  Allah  created  the  part  by  itself, 
he  could  not  see  it.  Praise  be  to  Allah  who  has  preserved 
the  Sunnites  from  the  heresies  which  we  have  given  in  this 
chapter  on  abu-al-Hudhail. 

4.  Concerning  the  Nagzamlyah.  These  are  the  followers 
of  abu-Ishak  Ibrahim  ibn-Saiyar,  called  al-Nazzam.1  The 
Mu'tazilah  try  to  deceive  the  common  people  when  they 
assert  that  he  was  called  al-Nazzam  because  he  composed 

*J.  A.  O.  S.,  vol.  xxix,  p.  58.  Horten,  ibid.,  p.  189.  ShahrastanI, 
ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  53.     Macdonald,  ibid.,  pp.  140,  141,  152. 

135 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

prose  and  well-measured  poetry.     As  a  matter  of  fact,  he 
composed  only  beads  in  the  market  of  al-Basrah,  and  it  was 
because  of  this  that  he  was  called  al-Nazzam.1     During  his 
youth  he  mingled  with  the  sect  of  the  Dualists  and  the 
Sophists  (Sumamyah),  who  assert  that  all  proofs  are  equal. 
He  later  fell  in  with  the  heretic  philosophers,  after  which 
he  associated  with  Hisham  ibn-al-Hakam  al-Rafidi.     From 
Hisham  and  the  heretic  philosophers  he  took  the  view  on 
the  non-existence  of  the  atom  that  is  indivisible.    From  this 
he  drew  his  view  of  the  leap  which  no  one  before  had 
thought  of.     From  the  dualists  he  took  his  view  that  he 
114  who  performs  justice  can  neither  oppress  nor  lie.     He  fur- 
ther took   from  Hisham  ibn-al-Hakam  that  colors,   taste, 
smell  and  sound  are  bodies.     It  was  from  this  heresy  that 
he  drew  the  conclusion  that  bodies  penetrate  each  other  in 
the  same  space.     He  agreed,2  moreover,  with  the  dualists, 
with  the  innovators  among  philosophers,  and  with  the  quasi- 
heathen  in  Islam.     He  also  admired  the  view  of  the  Brah- 
mans  who  disbelieved  in  prophecies.     He  did  not,  however, 
venture  to  profess  this  view,  fearing  the  sword.     Further- 
more, he  denied  the  miraculous  nature  of  the  Koran  as  re- 
gards its  composition,  and  he  also  denied  the  miracles  which 
are  reported  of  our  Prophet — for  example,  "the  splitting  of 
the  moon;  that  stones  in  his  hand  had  praised  Allah;  that 
water  had  sprung  forth  between  his  fingers  " — so  that  deny- 
ing the  miracles  of  our  Prophet  he  almost  came  to  deny  his 
prophecy.    Moreover,  he  found  the  fulfilment  of  the  regula- 
tions of  Islamic  law  unbearable.    He  did  not,  however,  dare 
to  profess  its  abolition,  although  he  denied  evidences  leading 
to  it.     It  was  on  this  ground  that  he  denied  "  the  evidence 
of  the  agreement  of  the  community  and  the  evidence  of 
analogy,"    in   developing  the   derivative   institutes   of   the 

1  Naszdm  means  a  composer. 

2  Text  uncertain,  wadalin?    Horten,  ibid.,  p.  170. 

136 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

law.  He  also  rejected  proof  drawn  from  witnesses  whose 
evidence  is  not  accepted,  as  well  as  the  claim  that  knowl- 
edge is  natural.  He  himself  taught  that  the  Companions 
had  agreed  in  developing  these  institutes,  and  he  reminded 
the  people  of  what  he  had  read  in  the  pages  written  by 
his  opponents.  He  criticized  the  juridical  decisions  of  the 
Companions,  however,  and  of  all  of  the  sects  of  Islam, 
which  had  split  over  doctrine  or  tradition,  including  the 
Khawarij  and  the  Shi'ites  and  the  Najjariyah.  Most  of  the 
Mu'tazilah  united  in  condemning  al-Nazzam.  Of  the  Kada- 
riyah,  only  a  few  followed  him  in  his  errors,  e.  g.  al-Aswari  115 
and  ibn-Hayit,  Fadl  al-Hadathi  and  al-Jahiz;  each  one  of 
them  differing  with  him  on  some  of  his  errors,  and  adding 
to  others.  The  admiration  of  this  minority  which  followed 
him  was  like  the  admiration  of  the  scarab  beetle  when  rolling 
its  ball  (of  dung).  Most  of  the  sheikhs  of  the  Mu'tazilah 
agreed  that  he  was  a  heretic,  including  abu-al-Hudhail,  who 
called  him  a  heretic  in  his  book  entitled  An  Answer  to  al- 
Nazzam,  also  in  his  book  directed  against  him  on  Accidents, 
Man  and  Indivisible  Atoms.  The  view  for  which  al-Jubba  1 
condemned  him,  was  the  one  which  held  that  the  deeds  of 
Allah  are  brought  forth  by  the  affirmation  of  (their)  crea- 
tion. In  this  case  it  is  al-Jubba'i  who  is  the  heretic,  and  no 
one  else.  We  would  like  to  mention  a  few  of  some  of  the 
heresies  of  the  Mu'tazilah. 

Al-Jubba'i  also  condemned  al-Nazzam  for  rejecting  that 
Allah  could  be  tyrannical,  as  well  as  for  his  view  about  the 
four  humours  of  the  body.  It  was  on  this  last  subject  that 
he  wrote  a  book  against  him  and  against  Mu'ammar. 

Among  the  Mu'tazilah  there  was  also  al-Iskaf  1  who  wrote 
a  book  against  al-Nazzam  in  which  he  condemned  him  for 
most  of  his  doctrines.  Ja'far  ibn-Harb  also  wrote  a  book 
concerning  al-Nazzam' s  heresy  in  that  he  denied  the  in- 
divisible atom.     As  to  the  books  written  in  condemnation 

i37 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

of  him  by  the  Sunnites  and  the  orthodox,  Allah  alone  can 
count  them.  Our  sheikh  abii-1-Hasan  al-Ash'arl  wrote 
three  books  on  the  heresies  of  al-Nazzam.  Al-Kalanisi1 
also  wrote  books  and  dissertations  against  him.  The 
Kadi  abu-Bakr  Muhammad  ibn-abl-al-Taiyib  al-Ash'arl 
wrote  a  big  book  on  some  of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of 
al-Nazzam.  He  has  pointed  out  his  errors  in  the  book  on 
the  heresies  of  the  expositors.  In  this  book  of  ours  we 
shall  mention  the  most  famous  of  al-Nazzam's  heresies. 
First  of  all  we  will  take  up  his  theory  that  Allah  has  not 
116  the  power  to  do  to  his  worshippers  that  which  is  not  to 
their  good.  Nor  does  he  consider  Allah  capable  of  taking 
away  a  jot  from  the  enjoyment  of  the  people  of  paradise, 
because  their  enjoyment  is  their  just  share,  and  the  lessen- 
ing of  this  share  would  therefore  be  injustice.  Nor  can 
Allah  increase  the  torment  of  those  in  hell  a  jot,  nor  take 
a  jot  away  from  it.  He  also  claims  that  Allah  has  not 
the  power  to  remove  anyone  from  paradise,  or  to  throw 
into  hell  anyone  who  does  not  belong  to  the  people  of  hell. 
According  to  this  view,  he  said  that  if  a  child  stood  at 
the  edge  of  hell,  Allah  would  have  no  power  to  throw  him 
in,  but  the  child  could  throw  himself  in,  and  the  Zabaniyah  2 
can  throw  him  in.  To  this  he  added  that  Allah  could  not 
blind  a  person  who  has  sight,  nor  give  a  disease  to  a  healthy 
one,  nor  impoverish  a  rich  person,  if  he  knows  that  sight 
and  health  and  wealth  are  for  their  good.  In  the  same 
way  he  cannot  enrich  a  poor  person,  nor  heal  a  sick  one, 
if  he  knows  that  disease  and  sickness  and  poverty  are  for 
their  good.  To  this  he  then  added  the  view  that  Allah 
could  not  create  a   snake   or   a   scorpion,   or  a  body  of 

1  An  opponent  of  al-Ash'arl  who  died  in  870.     Horten,  ibid.,  p.  375. 

2  Certain  angels,  the  tormentors  of  the  damned  in  hell;  so-called 
because  of  their  thrusting  the  people  of  the  fire  thereinto.  The  angels 
mentioned  in  the  Koran  Surah  66,  v.  6. 

138 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

any  kind,  if  he  knows  that  the  creation  of  something  else 
would  be  better  than  their  creation.  The  Basriyah  among 
the  Mu'tazilah  condemned  this  view  and  said  that  he  who 
has  power  over  justice  must  have  power  over  injustice,  and 
he  who  has  power  over  truth  must  have  power  over  false- 
hood, though  he  may  not  commit  oppression,  nor  lie,  be- 
cause of  the  hideous  nature  of  these  acts  or  because  he  real- 
izes his  ability  to  do  without  them,  because  ability  to  do  a 
thing  necessitates  also  the  ability  to  do  the  opposite.  Now, 
if  al-Nazzam  held  that  Allah  had  no  power  over  injustice 
and  falsehood,  he  would  be  forced  to  say  that  he  had  no  117 
power  over  truth  and  justice  either.  Such  a  view  as  the 
latter  is  heresy,  bringing  in  its  train  other  heresies  as  bad. 
They  also  say  that  there  is  no  difference  between  al-Naz- 
zam's  view  that  Allah  had  no>  power  to  hinder  nor  to  cause 
to  act,  and  the  view  claiming  that  he  is  forced  to  perform 
deeds  without  his  own  choice.  This  also  is  a  heresy,  bring- 
ing in  its  train  other  heresies  as  bad.  One  of  the  remark- 
able acts  of  al-Nazzam  in  this  connection  is  that  he  wrote 
a  book  on  Dualism  and  in  it  expressed  his  surprise  at  the 
view  of  the  Manicheans,  that  light  orders  its  different  kinds 
which  are  to  be  found  in  darkness  to  do  good,  although 
darkness  can  do  only  evil  and  can  predicate  naught  but  evil 
deeds.  Al-Nazzam  expressed  his  surprise  that  the  Dualists 
blame  darkness  for  doing  evil  when  they  claim  that  it  has  no 
power  to  do  good,  but  can  do  evil  only.  One  might  say  to 
him,  "  If,  according  to  you,  Allah  is  to  be  praised  for  per- 
forming justice  and  truth,  and  has  not  the  power  to  per- 
form injustice  and  falsehood,  why  then  do  you  deny  the 
view  of  the  Dualists  in  blaming  darkness  for  doing  evil, 
even  though  it  can  do  nothing  else?" 

His  second  heresy  was  his  view  that  man  is  a  soul,  which, 
in  the  form  of  a  rarified  body  enters  the  compact  body. 
This  was  in  addition  to  his  other  view  that  this  soul  is  life 

139 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

in  union  with  the  body.     He  claimed  further  that  in  the 
body  it  became  a  compact  union,  and  therefore  one  sub- 
stance without  difference  or  opposition.     From  this  view 
results  the  heresy  that  it  is  not  man  who  can  be  seen,  but 
the  body  in  which  he  is.     This  would  force  the  conclusion 
118  that  the  Companions  did  not  see  the  Prophet  of  Allah,  but 
saw  only  the  mould  in  which  the  Prophet  was.     According 
to  this  no  one  sees  his  father  and  his  mother,  but  only  their 
moulds.     Furthermore,  if  he  says  of  man  that  he  is  not  an 
external  body,  but  only  a  soul  within  a  body,  he  must  then 
say  the  same  of  the  ass,  that  he  too  is  not  his  body  and  is 
only  a  soul  in  his  body,  and  that  he  is  the  life  in  union 
with   the  body.      This   would   be  true   also  of   the   horse 
and  the  rest  of  the  four-footed  animals,  and  all  the  birds 
and  reptiles  and  the  rest  of  animal  kind.     It  would  apply 
also  to  angels  and  jinn,  man  and  devils.     It  would,  there- 
fore, follow  that  no  one  ever  sees  an  ass  or  a  horse  or  a 
bird,  or  any  kind  of  animal.    Furthermore,  the  Prophet  did 
not  see  an  angel,  nor  do  the  angels  see  each  other.    In  fact, 
anyone  looking  must  see  only  the  moulds  of  the  things  which 
we  have  enumerated.     Still  further,  when  he  says  that  the 
soul  in  the  body  is  the  man,  and  that  it  is  the  doer  rather 
than  the  body  which  is  its  mould,  he  must  then  conclude 
that  it  is  the  soul  which  is  the  adulterer  or  the  thief  or  the 
murderer.    Accordingly,  if  the  body  is  lashed,  or  the  hand 
cut  off,  the  amputated  member  is  not  after  all  the  real  thief, 
nor  the  body  lashed  the  real  adulterer  .  .  .  this  is  sufficient; 
for  Allah  has  said :  "  The  whore  and  the  whore-monger 
.  .  .  scourge  each  one  of  them  with  an  hundred  stripes  " 
(Surah  24,  v.  2).    And  he  has  also  said :  "As  to  the  thief, 
whether  man  or  woman,  cut  ye  off  their  hands  in  recom- 
pense for  their  doings"  (Surah  5,  v.  42).    This  is  sufficient 
proof  from  the  Koran  of  his  error. 
1 J9       His  third  heresy  was  his  view  that  the  soul  which  is  man. 

140 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

has  the  power  (to  act)  of  itself,  lives  through  itself,  and 
becomes  incapacitated  because  of  a  calamity  which  befalls 
it,  this  incapacity  itself  being  a  body.    This  view  forces  him 
to  say  that  the  incapacitated  and  the  dead  are  the  soul  of 
the  man  who  is  living  and  able,  or  else  that  the  incapacitated 
dead  is  the  man's  body.     If  he  says  that  man  is  the  thing 
which  becomes  incapacitated  and  dies,  he  must  give  up  his 
view  that  man  lives  by  himself,  and  has  the  power  to  act  of 
himself ;  for  in  that  case  his  soul  exists  even  in  the  case  of 
his  death,  while  he  himself  is  dead  or  incapacitated.     If,  on 
the  other  hand,  he  claims  that  it  is  the  soul  which  has  strength 
of  itself,  and  that  it  is  the  body  that  dies  and  becomes  in- 
capacitated, then  it  must  be  different  from  that  which  lives 
and  has  power.     From  this  it  follows  that  Allah  has  no 
power  to  resuscitate  the  dead,  nor  cause  the  living  to  die, 
nor  to  give  power  to  an  incapacitated  person,  nor  to  in- 
capacitate an  able  one.     For  the  living  cannot  die,  nor  the 
strong  become  incapacitated.     But  Allah  has  attributed  to 
himself  the  ability  to  resuscitate  the  dead.     If  al-Nazzam 
claims  that  the  soul  lives  and  has  power  of  itself,  and  dies 
and  becomes  incapacitated  only  because  harm  comes  to  it, 
then  he  does  not  differ  from  those  who  claim  that  the  soul 
is  dead  and  becomes  incapacitated  of  itself,  and  lives  and 
has  strength  only  through  the  life  and  strength  that  enter 

into  it. 

His  fourth  heresy  is  the  view  that  the  soul  is  of  one  kind, 
and  its  deeds  of  another  kind;  that  bodies  are  of  two  kinds, 
living  and  dead;  and  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  living 
body  to  die,  or  for  the  dead  to  become  alive.  This  view  he 
took  from  the  Burhanite  Dualists,  who  claim  that  light  is 
an  imponderable  living  body  whose  property  is  to  be  always  120 
ascending,  and  that  darkness  is  a  heavy  dead  body  whose 
property  is  to  be  always  descending,  and  that  the  heavy 
dead  body  is  unable  to  become  light  [as  opposed  to  heavy], 

141 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

and  the  light  living  body  is  unable  to  become  a  heavy  dead 
body. 

In  his  fifth  heresy  he  contended  that  all  animals  were  of 
one  species,  because  they  all  agree  in  having  the  same  per- 
ceptive powers.  Thus  he  claimed  that  when  acts  agree,  it  is 
a  proof  that  what  caused  them  are  in  agreement.  He  claimed 
also  that  two  different  things  would  not  come  from  one  and 
the  same  species ;  just  as  fire  does  not  give  out  both  heat  and 
cold,  nor  snow  give  out  both  heat  and  cold.  This  in  truth 
is  the  view  of  the  Dualists,  that  light  does  good  and  not 
harm,  and  darkness  does  evil  and  no  good  comes  from  it; 
because  one  author  cannot  perform  two  different  acts,  just 
as  heat  and  cold  do  not  both  come  forth  from  fire,  nor  from 
snow.  The  strange  thing  is  that  he  compiled  a  book  against 
the  Dualists  in  which  he  pointed  out  to  them  the  impossi- 
bility of  mingling  light  and  darkness  if  they  belong  to  dif- 
ferent species  and  actions  and  had  movements  in  different 
directions.  In  spite  of  this  view,  he  claimed  that  light  and 
heavy  bodies  (soul  and  body),  though  different  in  species 
and  in  the  direction  of  their  motion,  penetrate  each  other  in 
the  same  space.  But  the  penetration  which  he  asserts  is 
worse  than  mingling,  which  the  Dualists  hold,  and  which 
he  disputed. 

His  sixth  heresy  is  his  view  that  it  is  the  nature  of  fire  to 
surmount  everything.  If,  therefore,  it  is  released  from  the 
121  filth  that  holds  it  in  this  world,  it  rises  until  it  goes  beyond 
heaven  and  the  Throne,  unless  some  other  of  its  species 
unites  with  it,  in  which  case  it  does  not  rise.  Of  the  soul 
he  said  the  same  thing,  that  when  it  is  separated  from  the 
body,  it  rises,  and  a  change  takes  place  in  it.  This  is  similar 
to  the  view  of  the  Dualists  that  the  parts  of  light  which 
mingle  with  the  parts  of  darkness,  when  they  separate  from 
the  latter,  rise  to  the  world  of  light,  and  when  the  light  be- 
comes permanent  above  the  heavens,  the  souls  unite  with  it. 

142 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

He  is,  therefore,  a  Dualist.  If  he  affirms  the  existence  of 
lire  above  the  atmosphere,  with  which  the  rising  fires  in  the 
atmosphere  combine,  he  is  one  of  the  Naturalists,  who  claim 
that  air  in  rising,  is  at  a  distance  from  the  earth  of  sixteen 
miles,  above  which  is  fire  which  reaches  the  sphere  of  the 
moon,  and  with  which  the  rising  flames  of  fire  unite.  Al- 
Nazzam  is  therefore  either  a  Dualist  or  a  Naturalist,  con- 
cealing himself  among  the  mass  of  the  Moslems. 

His  seventh  heresy  is  his  view  that  the  actions  of  animals 
are  all  of  one  species,  and  are  composed  of  motion  and 
quiescence.    Quiescence,  according  to  him,  is  limited  motion. 
Moreover,  he  considers  knowledge  and  will  motion,  and 
hence  accidentals.    All  accidentals,  according  to  him,  are  of 
one  species  —  all  motion.     As  to  color,  taste,  sound,  and 
senses,  these,  according  to  him,  are  different  permeating 
material  things.    The  result  of  this  view  of  his,  that  the  acts 
of  animals  are  of  one  species,  is  necessarily  that  belief  is 
like  unbelief  and  knowledge  like  ignorance,  and  love  like 
hatred.    Furthermore,  it  follows  that  the  acts  of  the  prophet 
toward  believers  are  like  the  acts  of  Satan  toward  unbeliev- 
ers, and  that  the  invitation  of  the  prophet  to  the  people  to   122 
join  the  religion  of  Allah  is  like  the  invitation  of  Satan  to 
go  astray.    In  some  of  the  books  he  has  gone  so  far  as  to  say 
that  all  these  acts  are  of  one  species,  differing  only  in  their 
name,  because  of  the  differences  of  their  order,  they  being 
of  one  species  because  they  are  all  acts  of  animals.    Accord- 
ing to  him,  one  animal  cannot  perform  two  different  acts,  just 
as  fire  can  not  make  cold  and  hot.   According  to  this,  al-Naz- 
zam  cannot  get  angry  with  anyone  who  scolds  or  courses  him, 
because  the  sentiment  of  the  author  who  said,  "  May  Allah 
curse  al-Nazzam,"  according  to  al-Nazzam,  is  just  the  same 
as  if  he  had  said,  "  May  Allah  bless  al-Nazzam."    Further- 
more, a  child  born  of  adultery  is  the  same  as  a  legal  child. 
If  he  himself  is  satisfied  with  such  a  doctrine  he  is  worthy 
of  it,  and  of  the  views  that  necessarily  follow. 

143 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

His  eighth  heresy  is  the  view  that  color,  taste,  smell, 
sound  and  sense  are  bodies,  and  that  many  bodies  can  per- 
meate one  and  the  same  space.  He  refuses  the  view  of 
Hisham  ibn-al-Hakam  that  knowledge  and  will  and  motion 
are  bodies,  saying  that  if  these  three  were  objects  they 
could  not  unite  in  one  thing,  nor  in  one  body.  And  yet  he 
holds  that  color,  taste  and  sound  are  bodies  permeating  each 
other  in  the  same  space ;  in  answering  his  opponent  he  con- 
futes himself.  He  who  maintains  that  bodies  permeate 
each  other  in  the  same  space  must  admit  the  possibility  of  a 
camel  passing  through  the  eye  of  a  needle ! 
123  His  ninth  heresy  is  his  view  concerning  sound.  He  claims 
that  there  are  not  two  men  on  the  earth  who  have  heard 
the  same  sound,  except  in  the  sense  that  it  (the  sound)  is 
of  the  same  species  of  sounds,  just  as  two  men  eat  one 
species  of  food,  even  if  that  which  one  of  them  eats  is  not 
what  the  other  eats.  This  view  developed  from  his  claim 
that  a  sound  is  heard  only  as  it  follows  into  the  spirit  on 
the  path  of  hearing.  It  is  not  possible,  however,  to  flow 
from  the  same  object  into  two  different  organs  of  hearing. 
He  compared  this  with  water  which  is  sprinkled  on  a  crowd 
of  people,  each  one  being  sprinkled  with  different  water. 
According  to  this  assumption  it  must  necessarily  follow  that 
no  one  has  heard  the  same  word  from  Allah,  nor  from  his 
prophet,  because  what  each  one  of  all  the  hearers  hears  is  a 
part  of  the  sound  of  the  word  of  the  speaker.  The  word  as 
a  whole  may  perhaps  consist  of  two  letters,  so  that  accord- 
ing to  him  one  of  them  is  not  the  word.  If  he  then  claims 
that  the  sound  is  not  a  word  nor  is  it  heard  except  when  it 
consists  of  several  letters,  it  follows  that  a  group  of  people 
cannot  hear  just  one  letter,  for  one  letter  cannot  divide  itself 
into  several  letters  according  to  the  number  of  hearers ! 

His  tenth  heresy  is  his  view  concerning  the  divisibility  of 
every  particle  ad  infinitum.     This  idea  implies  the  absurd 

144 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

view  that  Allah  does  not  include  the  whole  of  the  world  by 
knowing-  about  it,  yet  the  following  is  the  word  of  Allah  : 
"And  taketh  count  of  all  things  by  number"  (Surah  72, 
v.  28 ) .  One  of  his  peculiarities  is  that  he  denies  the  view 
of  the  Manicheans  to  the  effect  that  Ahriman,  who  is  the 
spirit  of  darkness,  passed  through  the  abodes  of  darkness,  124 
carrying  out  the  worst  possible  evil  until  he  saw  light.  In 
connection  with  this  al-Nazzam  said  to  them :  "  If  the 
abodes  of  darkness  stretch  downward  without  limit,  then 
how  can  Ahriman  pass  through  them?  For  to  pass  through 
what  has  no  end  is  impossible."  Although  denying  this,  he 
nevertheless  claimed  that  when  the  soul  separated  f  rom  the 
body,  it  passed  through  the  upper  world,  in  spite  of  the  fact 
that  he  maintained  that  the  space  in  the  upper  worlds 
through  which  the  spirit  passes  is  infinite  in  its  parts,  while 
each  part  in  its  turn  is  infinite  in  its  part.  If  this  is  the 
case,  how  can  the  spirit  traverse  them  in  limited  time  ?  It 
was  to  make  this  possible  that  he  adopted  the  doctrine  of 
the  leap,  a  doctrine  which  had  never  been  held  by  any  phil- 
osophers before  him.  Stranger  than  that,  he  drew  from 
the  Dualists  the  conclusion  that  light  and  darkness  are  finite 
in  everyone  of  the  six  directions.  What  led  him  to  this 
way  of  thinking  was  that  they  held  that  both  light  and  dark- 
ness were  finite  in  the  direction  in  which  they  met.  Accord- 
ing to  this,  was  he  trying  to  show  that  everybody  has  finite 
parts  in  the  center  because  it  is  finite  on  all  sides  ?  If,  how- 
ever, the  finiteness  of  the  body  in  its  six  directions  does  not 
incur  finiteness  in  its  center  (according  to  him),  he  is  then 
not  disagreeing  with  the  Dualists  in  their  view  that  all  light 
and  darkness  are  finite  on  the  side  at  which  they  meet.  One 
must  not,  however,  conclude  that  they  are  finite  on  all  other 
sides. 

Al-Nazzam's  eleventh  heresy  is  the  doctrine  of  the  leap. 
He  says  that  a  body  which  is  in  a  given  place,  may  pass  from 

145 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

that  place  to  a  third  place  or  a  tenth  without  necessarily 
traversing  the  places  which  separate  the  first  and  the  tenth, 
nor  by  being  annihilated  in  the  first  to  be  resuscitated  in  the 
tenth.  If  al-Nazzam  is  just,  we  will  refer  this  case  to  him 
to  declare  its  fallacy,  although  we  believe  that  after  the 
(famous)  arbitration  of  abu-Musa  al-Ash'ari  and  'Amr 
ibn-al-Asi  any  arbitration  is  nonsense. 

His  twelfth  heresy  was  so  horrible  that  the  heavens  were 
almost  rent  asunder  by  it.  It  is  the  view  that  no  informa- 
tion about  Allah,  or  his  prophet,  or  his  worshippers,  can  be 
accepted  as  true.  Furthermore,  that  bodies  and  colors  can 
not  be  known  simply  by  information  about  them.  What 
drove  him  to  this  accursed  view  was  his  other  belief  that 
there  are  two  kinds  of  known  things,  that  which  is  percep- 
tible and  that  which  is  not  perceptible.  The  perceptible  are 
bodies  about  which  knowledge  can  be  acquired  only  through 
the  senses.  According  to  him,  the  senses  can  perceive  only 
that  which  is  body;  color,  taste,  smell  and  sound  being,  ac- 
cording to  him,  bodies.  It  is  because  of  this  that  they  are 
reached  by  the  senses.  As  to  the  imperceptible,  it  also  is  of 
two  kinds,  the  eternal  and  the  accidental.  They  way  to  know 
the  two  is  not  through  information,  but  only  through  syllo- 
gism and  intuition,  and  therefore  neither  through  the  senses 
nor  information.  He  was  asked  in  this  connection  how  he 
knew  that  Muhammad,  as  well  as  the  rest  of  the  prophets 
and  the  kings,  were  on  the  earth,  since  nothing  can  be  known 
through  information.  His  answer  was  that  those  who  actu- 
ally saw  the  prophet,  in  the  act  of  seeing  him  took  from  him 
a  particle  which  they  divided  among  themselves,  and  united 
with  their  souls.  When  later  they  reported  his  existence  to 
their  descendants,  some  of  this  particle  left  them  and  joined 
the  souls  of  the  descendants.  The  descendants,  therefore, 
know  the  prophet  because  a  particle  from  the  prophet  has 
126  joined  with  their  soul.     This  continues  as  each  report  is 

146 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

passed  on  to  the  succeeding  generation  down  to  our  own 
time.  The  objection  made  to  this  was  that  Jews,  Christians, 
Magians  and  heretics  know  that  our  prophet  was  on  earth. 
Does  al-Nazzam  then  think  that  a  particle  has  passed  from 
him  into  the  spirit  of  the  unbelievers  ?  This  is  a  necessary 
conclusion.  He  claimed,  furthermore,  that  when  the  people 
of  paradise  have  intercourse  with  the  people  of  hell,  and  the 
people  of  hell  see  them,  and  the  two  converse  with  each 
other,  particles  of  each  become  exchanged.  In  this  way 
particles  of  the  bodies  and  spirits  of  the  people  of  hell  enter 
paradise,  while  particles  of  the  bodies  and  spirits  of  the 
people  of  paradise  enter  hell.  And  there  is  enough  shame 
on  him  for  having  dealt  with  this  heresy. 

Al-Nazzam's  thirteenth  heresy  is  reported  by  al-Jahiz, 
and  is  to  the  effect  that  forms  and  bodies  renew  themselves 
as  they  pass  from  one  condition  to  another,  and  moreover 
that  Allah  creates  this  world  and  that  which  is  in  it  without 
first  annihilating  it  and  then  resuscitating  it.  Abu-al-Husain 
al-Khaiyat  says  in  his  book  against  abu-al-Ruwandi  that 
al-Jahiz  made  a  mistake  in  his  report  about  this  view  of 
al-Nazzam.  Now  it  might  be  said  to  al-Khaiyat,  "  If 
al-Jahiz  were  right  in  his  report,  you  should  accept  it  as  a 
sign  of  al-Nazzam's  foolishness  and  mental  aberration ;  but 
if  he  lied  about  him,  then  you  should  accept  it  as  a  sign  of 
the  shamelessness  of  al-Jahiz  and  his  idiocy."  And  this  was 
the  sheikh  of  the  Mu'tazilah  and  their  philosopher !  Since 
the  Mu'tazilah  lied  about  their  Lord  and  their  Prophet,  we 
cannot  deny  that  they  lied  about  their  ancestors. 

His  fourteenth  heresy  is  his  view  that  Allah  created  man  l27 
and  four-footed  beasts  and  the  rest  of  the  animals,  and  all 
kinds  of  plants,  and  the  forms  of  minerals  all  at  once;  and 
that  he  did  not  create  Adam  before  creating  his  children, 
nor  did  he  create  the  mothers  before  creating  their  children. 
He  claimed  that  Allah  created  all  these  at  one  time,  but  that 

i47' 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

certain  things  are  more  numerous  than  others.    So  that  the 
question  of  priority  and  sequence  is  merely  one  of  appear- 
ance and  place.     By  this  view  he  condemns  as  a  lie  every- 
thing that  has  been  agreed  upon  by  the  ancestors  of  the 
Believers,  as  well  as  the  people  of  the  Book,  whether  Jews, 
Christians  or  Samaritans.    The  view  of  all  these  being  that 
Allah  created  the  tablet  and  the  pen  before  the  creation  of 
the  heavens  and  the  earth.     As  to  the  Moslems,  the  only 
thing  over  which  they  differ  is  whether  heaven  or  the  earth 
was  created  first.    Al-Nazzam  differs  from  the  Moslems  and 
the  people  of  the  Book,  as  well  as  from  most  of  the  Mu'ta- 
zilah,  because  the  Basrah   Mu'tazilah  claimed  that  Allah 
created  his  will  before  creating  the  thing  willed ;  while  the 
rest  of  them  assert  that  some  bodies  in  the  world  were 
created   before   others.      Abu-al-Hudhail   claimed   that  he 
created  his  word  to  the  thing  "  but  not  in  a  place  "  before  he 
created  bodies  and  accidents.    Al-Nazzam's  view  about  what 
is  manifest  in  bodies  and  what  is  hidden,  as  well  as  their 
permeation,  is  worse  than  the  view  of  the  Zahiriyah  who 
claimed  that  all  accidents  are  hidden  in  bodies.     The  char- 
acteristics of  the  bodies,  however,  are  ascribed  to  them  by 
the  manifestation  of  certain  accidents,  and  the  hiding  of 
I2^  others.    In  both  doctrines,  there  is  a  turning  away  from  the 
Duhnyah  (Dahrite?)  view  to  the  denial  of  the  finite  char- 
acter of  bodies  and  accidents ;  for  they  assert  that  all  these 
exist  in  every  condition,   provided   some  are  hidden   and 
others  manifest,  although  nothing  may  have  appeared  in  the 
condition  of  manifestation.    All  this  is  heresy  and  unbelief; 
and  in  fact  everything  that  leads  to  error  is  like  it. 

His  fifteenth  heresy  is  that  the  composition  of  the  Koran, 
and  the  beauty  of  the  literary  arrangement  of  its  words,  do 
not  show  the  miraculous  character  of  its  Prophet;  nor  are 
they  a  proof  of  the  reliability  of  his  claim  to  prophecy.  The 
basis  for  the  proof  of  his  reliability  lies  only  in  what  the 

148 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

Koran  contains  regarding  the  manifestation  of  unknown 
things.  As  to  the  composition  of  the  Koran,  and  the  beauty 
of  the  literary  arrangements  of  its  verses,  verily  the  wor- 
shippers are  capable  of  the  same,  and  even  of  what  is  more 
beautiful  than  this,  in  composition  and  literary  arrangement. 
But  this  view  is  in  opposition  to  the  words  of  Allah :  "Were 
men  and  jinn  assembled  to  produce  the  like  of  this  Koran, 
they  could  not  produce  its  like,  though  the  one  should  help 
the  other  "  (Surah  17,  v.  90).  In  denying  the  miraculous 
character  of  the  Koran,  he  is  denying  the  prophecy  of  the 
man  who  defied  the  Arabs  to  produce  anything  like  it. 

His  sixteenth  heresy  is  his  view  that  a  report  may  be  a 
lie,  even  though  the  number  of  the  transmitters  may  surpass 
the  prescribed  limits,  and  even  though  the  aims  of  those 
who  transmit  it  and  their  motives  may  differ.  He  asserts 
this,  together  with  the  view,  that  a  report  may,  on  the  other 
hand,  be  true,  even  though  only  a  few  may  have  handed  it 
down.  Our  followers  haye  condemned  him,  as  well  as  129 
those  of  the  Mu'tazilah  who  agree  with  him  in  this  doctrine 
which  he  adopted. 

His  seventeenth  heresy  is  as  follows :  the  agreement  of 
the  Moslem  community  of  each  century,  as  well  as  that  of 
all  centuries  combined  (as  regards  opinion  and  inference) 
may  be  an  error.  From  this  fact  he  was  bound  to  conclude 
that  nothing  upon  which  the  community  have  agreed  can  be 
trusted,  because,  according  to  him,  there  is  always  a  possi- 
bility of  their  agreeing  on  an  error.  Since  some  of  the  reg- 
ulations of  the  law  have  been  taken  by  Moslems  from  re- 
ports that  had  been  handed  down,  others  from  single  re- 
ports, others  from  things  upon  which  the  community  had 
agreed,  deducing  them  by  analogy  and  inference;  and 
since  al-Nazzam  disbelieves  in  the  evidence  drawn  from 
what  has  been  handed  down,  as  well  as  from  agreement  and 
analogy,  and  also  rejects  a  single  report,  unless  the  knowl- 

149 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

edge  it  gives  is  unmistakable,  he  is  putting  himself  in  a 
position  to  reject  the  divine  regulations  of  the  law,  by  re- 
jecting its  methods. 

His  eighteenth  heresy  comes  under  the  head  of  threats. 
He  claims  that  the  man  who  takes  by  force,  or  steals  one  hun- 
dred and  ninety-nine  dirhams  only,  did  not  commit  a  crime. 
In  fact,  he  is  not  to  blame,  until  what  he  has  taken  by  force 
or  stolen,  and  about  which  he  has  acted  treacherously, 
amounts  to  two  hundred  dirhams  and  over.  If  he  has  based 
this  view  on  the  amount  of  a  theft  for  which  the  penalty  is 
the  amputation  of  the  hand,  he  is  wrong,  for  there  is  no  one 
who  would  limit  that  punishment  to  two  hundred  dirhams. 
On  the  contrary,  such  a  punishment  is  considered  by  most 
people  to  be  necessary  for  the  theft  of  even  a  quarter  of  a 
dinar,  or  its  value.  With  this  view  al-Shafi'i  and  his  follow- 
ers agree.  Malik  said  it  should  be  inflicted  for  a  quarter  of 
a  dinar  or  three  dirhams.  Abu-Hanlfah  said  amputation 
should  be  inflicted  for  ten  dirhams  and  more,  while  others 
said  it  should  be  inflicted  for  forty  dirhams,  or  their  value. 
130  The  Ibadiyah  considered  amputation  necessary  for  small  as 
well  as  big  thefts,  no  one  limiting  the  punishment  to  two 
hundred  dirhams.  If  the  fact  of  guilt,  deserving  of  ampu- 
tation, is  authenticated  by  the  thief  himself,  even  the  rob- 
bery of  thousands  of  dinars  will  not  be  a  transgression,  be- 
cause amputation  is  not  inflicted  on  one  who  takes  by  force, 
and  then  confesses.  It  follows,  moreover,  that  he  who 
steals  the  thousands  that  are  not  guarded  or  that  belong  to 
his  own  son,  is  not  guilty,  because  no  decision  is  to  be 
found  about  these  two  cases  [the  case  of  one  who  confesses, 
and  one  who  steals  unguarded  thousands].  If,  however, 
al-Nazzam  has  based  his  limitation  of  the  punishment  to 
two  hundred  on  the  fact  that  the  two  hundred  is  the  amount 
given  for  alms,  he  must  then  condemn  the  man  who  steals 
forty  sheep,  the  number  necessary  for  the  offering  to  be 

150 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

considered  alms,  even  if  its  value  was  below  two  hundred 
dirhams.  If  analogy  has  no  place  in  this  definition  of  his 
and  there  is  no  reference  to  it  in  the  Koran,  or  the  true 
tradition,  then  his  definition  comes  only  as  the  whisper  of 
Satan  who  invites  him  to  error. 

His  nineteenth  heresy  is  his  view  that  faith  is  the  avoid- 
ing of  major  sins.  The  result  of  this  view  was  that  he  re- 
garded words  and  deeds  as  in  no  way  faith.  Furthermore, 
prayer,  as  regards  its  performance,  is  neither  faith  nor 
drawn  from  faith;  for  faith  is  the  forsaking  of  major  sins. 
At  the  same  time  he  held  that  both  the  acts  and  their  for- 
saking are  virtue.  As  to  this,  men  before  him  were  divided, 
some  saying  that  all  prayer  was  faith,  and  others  that  noth- 
ing in  prayer  was  faith.  Al-Nazzam  differed  from  both  of 
these  groups,  however,  claiming  that  whereas  prayer  is  not 
faith,  the  forsaking  of  major  sins  is. 

His  twentieth  heresy  comes  under  the  head  of  the  future  131 
life.  It  was  his  view  that  scorpions,  snakes,  beetles,  bees, 
flies,  scarabs,  dogs  and  swine,  as  well  as  the  rest  of  the  ani- 
mals and  insects,  enter  heaven.  He  claimed  also  that  every- 
one and  everything  that  Allah  judges  worthy  of  heaven  is 
not  necessarily  of  a  different  grade  of  precedence.  Accord- 
ingly he  claimed  that  Abraham  the  son  of  the  prophet  of 
Allah  could  not  in  heaven  have  precedence  over  the  children 
of  the  faithful.  Nor  do  the  children  of  the  faithful  in 
heaven  differ  in  degree,  pleasure  or  grade  from  the  snakes, 
scorpions  and  beetles,  because  there  is  no  work  for  the  latter 
just  as  there  is  no  work  for  the  former.  Thus  he  limits  the 
Lord  of  the  worlds  from  making  a  difference  for  the  chil- 
dren of  the  prophets,  by  giving  them  more  pleasure  than  he 
bestows  on  the  insects.  Al-Nazzam  did  not  even  stop  here, 
but  went  on  to  say  that  the  Lord  of  the  worlds  did  not  even 
have  the  power  to  do  this.  Moreover,  he  claimed  that  Allah 
bestowed  on  the  prophets  only  that  which  he  bestowed  on 

151 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

the  animals,  because,  according  to  his  view  of  precedence, 
there  is  no  difference  made  between  those  who  are  wise  and 
those  who  are  not,  for  these  differ  only  as  to  reward  and 
punishment,  according  to  the  worth  of  their  works.  Hold- 
ing such  a  view  as  this,  al-Nazzam  cannot  get  angry  at  any 
one  who  says  to  him :  "  May  Allah  resuscitate  you  with  dogs 
and  swine  and  snakes  and  scorpions  in  their  quarters." 
And  our  wish  for  him  is  that  he  may  remain  in  the  condi- 
tion to  which  this  prayer  consigns  him. 

His  twenty-first  heresy  appeared  when  he  brought  for- 
ward his  view  about  mental  sciences.  He  introduced  these 
132  same  errors,  which  had  never  been  heard  of  before,  into  the 
dominion  of  religious  law.  His  view  was  that  divorce  en- 
forced by  any  of  the  following  formulae  was  not  legal ;  e.  g. 
the  word  of  the  husband  to  his  wife :  "  Thou  art  free,  or 
liberated,  or  thou  art  free  to  go  thy  way,  or  follow  thy 
people,  or  depart,"  or  any  other  divorce  formulae  accepted 
by  the  Canonists,  whether  he  intends  divorce  or  not.  The 
Canonists  agree  that  such  formulae  constitute  a  divorce,  pro- 
vided there  is  intention  of  divorce.  The  lawyers  of  al-Trak 
hold  that  even  if  used  only  in  anger,  the  formula  for  divorce 
is  equivalent  to  the  declaration  of  divorce  even  if  no  inten- 
tion is  present. 

Another  of  al-Nazzam's  errors  is  about  separation,  for 
he  says  that  to  have  a  husband  say,  "  You  are  to  me  like 
the  back  of  my  mother,"  means  divorce ;  whereas  if  he  uses 
the  word  belly  or  generative  organs,  instead  of  back,  it  is  not 
a  divorce.  This  differs  entirely  from  the  customary  view 
of  the  community.  He  also  condemned  abu-Musa  al-Ash'ari 
for  his  decision. 

Furthermore,  al-Nazzam  brought  forward  his  view  that 
sleep  does  not  destroy  the  purity  of  ablutions,  unless  there 
is  excrement.  This  is  contrary  to  the  view  of  the  majority 
of  the  leaders,  who  believed  that  sleep  lying  flat  destroys 

152 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

purification,  and  who  differ  only  about  sleep  taken  in  a  sit- 
ting, kneeling,  or  bent  position.  Abu-Hamfah  held  that  it 
is  permissible,  while  most  of  the  followers  of  al-Shafi'i  de- 
nied it  by  the  process  of  analogy. 

Another  of  his  errors  was  that  he  claimed  that  he  who 
intentionally  neglects  a  prescribed  prayer,  will  receive  no 
merit  for  fulfilling  it,  nor  is  its  fulfilment  obligatory  for 
him.     To  the  rest  of  the  community,  this  was  a  heresy 
similar  to  the  one  which  claimed  that  the  five  prayers  are 
not  prescribed.     Some  of  the  religious  lawyers  of  the  com- 
munity say  that  if  a  man  neglects  a  prescribed  prayer,  he 
must  perform  the  prayers  of  one  night  and  one  day.     Sa'id 
ibn-al-Musaiyab    said:    "  He   who    forsakes    a    prescribed   133 
prayer  so  that  the  time  for  it  is  passed,  must  perform  a 
thousand  prayers  (to  make  tip)."    The  place  of  prayer  has 
been  so  dignified  by  some  religious  lawyers,  e.  g.  Ahmad 
ibn-Hanbal,  that  they  condemn  as  an  infidel  any  man  who 
forsakes  it  intentionally,  though  he  may  not  consider  its 
negligence  lawful.    Al-ShafYi  held  that  a  man  who  neglected 
prayer  intentionally  should  be  executed;  although  he  did 
not  condemn  as  a  heretic  the  man  who  neglected  it  out  of 
laziness  but  not  if  he  considered  it  illegal.     Abu-Hamfah, 
on  the  other  hand,  decreed  imprisonment  for  the  neglect  of 
prayer,  accompanied  by  torture,  until  the  man  prayed.    Al- 
Nazzam's  disagreement  with  the  community  over  the  obli- 
gation of  performing  neglected  prescribed  prayers,  is  sim- 
ilar to  the  disagreement  of  the  infidels   (zanadikah)   over 
the  obligation  of  any  prayer.     Both  disagreements  are  not 
to  have  consideration. 

In  addition  to  the  heresies  which  we  have  recounted,  al- 
Nazzam  has  attacked  the  reports  of  the  Companions  and 
the  Disciples  because  of  their  interpretation  of  the  Koran. 
Al-Jahiz  alluded  to  him  in  his  work  entitled  Knowledge 
(al-Maf&rif),  and  in  his  book  known  as  Opinion  (Futya), 

153 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

saying  that  he  blamed  the  traditionalists  because  they  handed 
down  traditions  of  abu-Hurairah.1  He  claimed  that  abu- 
Hurairah  was  the  worst  of  liars,  and  he  attacked  'Umar  al- 
Faruk.2  In  fact,  he  claimed  that  Faruk  was  in  doubt  about 
his  own  faith  at  the  battle  of  al-Hudaibiyah  as  well  as  on  the 
day  of  the  death  of  the  Prophet.  He  was  also  with  those 
who  were  angry  with  the  Prophet  on  the  night  of  the  'Aka- 
bah,3and  he  struck  Fatimah  and  .  .  .  (not  clear  in  text). 
Furthermore,  he  criticized  'Umar  for  sending  Nasr  ibn-al- 
Hajjaj  from  al-Madmah  to  al-Basrah.  And  he  claimed  that 
'Umar  introduced  genuflections  in  prayer,  and  forbade  tem- 
porary marriage  [mufah]  during  pilgrimage,  and  the  mar- 
riage of  a  freedman  to  an  Arab  woman.  He  blamed 
'Uthman  for  sending  al-Hakam  ibn-al-'Asi 4  to  al-Madinah 
and  for  making  al-Walid  ibn-'Ukbah5  his  governor  over 
al-Kufah.  Al-Walid  was  the  man  who  led  the  prayer  when 
he  was  drunk. 
134  He  also  blamed  'Uthman  for  helping  Sa'id  ibn-al-'Asi 
with  forty  thousand  dirhams  for  his  marriage  contract. 
Moreover,  he  accused  him  of  claiming  for  himself  the  pos- 
session of  the  land  belonging  to  the  Moslem  community 
(hima). 

He  then  mentioned  'All,  claiming  that  when  asked  about 
a  cow  that  had  killed  a  donkey,  he  said :  "  I  judge  this 
according  to  my  opinion."     In  this  he  expressed  his  ignor- 

1  Tabari  ed.  Zotenberg,  vol.  iii,  pp.  466,  703  et  scq. 

2  By-name  given  to  'Umar  the  caliph. 

z'Akabah.  Ibn-Hisham,  Biography,  p.  288.  The  night  on  which  alle- 
giance was  sworn  to  the  Prophet.    Margoliouth,  Mohammed,  pp.  202,  204. 

4  Mistake  in  Baghdadl.  Instead  of  Hakam  ibn-al-'Asi,  it  should  be 
al-Hakam  ibn-abi-al-'AsI.  Cf.  Ibn-Hajar,  vol.  i,  p.  709  where  this  very- 
incident  is  mentioned. 

5  Ibn-Hajar,  vol.  iii,  p.  1312.    Tabari,  ibid.,  vol.  iii,  p.  566. 
9  Ibid.,  p.  566  et  seq. 

154 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

ance,  for  who  is  he  that  he  should  judge  according  to  his 
opinion  ? 

He  also  attacked  abu-Mas'ud *  for  his  view  about  the 
tradition  which  relates  to  the  marriage  of  the  daughter  of 
JVashtif.2  [For  he  claimed]  "  I  judge  according  to  my 
own  opinion,  and  if  it  is  a  correct  judgment,  then  it  is  from 
Allah,  but  if  it  is  a  mistaken  one,  then  it  is  from  me."  In 
addition  he  contended  that  abu-Mas'ud  was  lying  when  he 
stated  that  the  Prophet  had  said :  "  He  is  happy  who  re- 
joices in  the  womb  of  his  mother,  and  he  is  unhappy  who  is 
unhappy  in  the  womb  of  his  mother."  Al-Nazzam  also 
considered  him  a  liar  in  his  report  of  the  "  splitting  of  the 
moon,"  and  in  his  report  about  the  Jinns  of  the  "  night  of 
the  Jinn."  Such  was  the  view  of  al-Nazzam  with  regard 
to  the  report  of  the  Companions  and  of  the  people  of  the 
abode  of  paradise,  of  whom  Allah  said :  "  Well  pleased 
now  hath  God  been  with  the  believers  when  they  plighted 
fealty  to  thee  under  the  tree  "  (Surah  48,  v.  18).  He  who 
gets  angry  with  those  whom  Allah  blesses,  he  incurs  anger 
rather  than  they.  He  then  said  in  his  book  that  those  of 
the  Companions  who  believed  in  analogy  either  are  of  opin- 
ion that  this  is  legal  for  them  and  ignore  that  it  is  forbidden 
to  judge  by  analogy  according  to  decisions  directed  against 
them,  or  else  wish  to  be  remembered  as  disagreeing,  and  thus 
be  leaders  of  sects.  Because  of  this  [latter  difficulty]  they 
chose  to  accept  analogy  [as  legal] .  Al-Nazzam  thus  attrib- 
uted to  them  the  preference  of  desire  to  religion.  [For  they 
deliberately  chose  the  view  that  cast  the  least  reflection  on 
them.]  The  only  crime  of  the  followers,  then,  according  to 
this  hideous  infidel,  is  that  they  were  unitarians,  who  did  not 
hold  the  heresy  of  the  Kadariyah  who  reckoned  numerous   135 

1  Nawawi,  p.  757,  under  'Ukbah  ibn-'Amr.   Tabari,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  439 ; 
vol.  iii,  p.  36. 

2  None  of  the  more  important  historians  mention  this  man. 

155 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 


other  creators  with  Allah.    He  rejects  the  tradition  of  abu- 
Mas'ud,  that  he  is  happy  who  is  happy  in  his  mother's  womb, 
and  he  is  unhappy  who  is  unhappy  in  his  mother's  womb, 
only  because  this  differs  from  the  view  of  the  Kadariyah 
who  assert  that  neither  happiness  nor  misery  come  from  the 
decree  of  Allah  or  through  his  predestination.    Al-Nazzam's 
denial  of  the  "  splitting  of  the  moon  "  is  due  to  his  unwill- 
ingness to  ascribe  any  miracle  to  our  Prophet,  just  as  he  de- 
nies any  miracle  in  connection  with  the  composition  of  the 
Koran.     If  he  considers  the  "  splitting  of  the  moon  "  im- 
possible, although  it  is  mentioned  by  Allah  in  the  Koran, 
then,  according  to  what  he  says  of  the  processes  of  the  mind, 
he  is  forced  to  conclude  that  he  who  combined  the  parts  of 
the  moon  is  unable  to  separate  them.     If,  however,  he  ac- 
cepted the  " splitting  of  the  moon"  as  lying  within  the  range 
of  ability  and  possibility,  then  what  is  it  that  made  him 
accuse  abu-Mas'ud  of  being  a  liar,  in  his  report  of  the  "split- 
ting of   the  moon,"   although  Allah  mentioned   it   in  the 
Koran :  "  The  hour  hath  approached  and  the  Moon  hath 
been  cleft;  But  whenever  they  see  a  miracle  they  turn  aside 
and  say,  '  This  is  well-devised  magic  '  "  (Surah  54,  v.  1  and 
2 ) .    Al-Nazzam's  assertion  that  the  "splitting  of  the  moon " 
never  took  place,  is  worse  than  the  view  of  the  polytheists 
who  hold  that  even  when  they  saw  it  splitting,  it  took  place 
by  magic.     He  who  denies  the  existence  of  prophetic  mir- 
acles is  worse  than  he  who  attempts  to  explain  them  in  some 
other  way.    As  to  his  denial  of  vision  to  the  Jinn,  he  must 
verily  conclude  that  the  Jinn  cannot  see  each  other.    If,  how- 
ever, he  accepts  their  ability  to  see,  why  does  he  say  that 
abu-Mas'ud  is  lying  when  he  claims  that  they  can  see.     Ac- 
cording to  all  this,  al-Nazzam  in  addition  to  what  we  have 
reported  of  his  error  was  the  most  corrupt  of  the  creations 
of  Allah,  the  boldest  in  committing  major  sins,  and  the  most 
136  addicted  to  drinking   spirits.      'Abdallah   ibn-Muslim-ibn- 

156 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  RADARIYAH 

Kutaibah  x  has  mentioned  in  his  book  entitled  "  The  Dif- 
ference of  Tradition,"  that  al-Nazzam  drank  spirits  in  the 
morning  and  the  evening,  singing  the  following  verses 
about  drink : 

« I  do  not  cease  taking  the  spirit  of  the  flagon  in  gentleness 
And  consider  it  legal  to  drink  the  blood  of  the  unslain. 
Thus  I  was  revived  and  felt  two  spirits  in  my  body, 
While  the  flagon  lay  a  body  without  a  spirit." 

In  his  attack  on  his  report  of  the  Companions,  in  the  heresy 
of  his  views,  and  in  the  errors  of  his  acts,  his  case  is  like 
that  of  the  man  about  whom  the  following  proverb  is  told : 
He  who  has  a  bad  faith  and  is  mean  in  his  descent,  does  not 
leave  a  shameful  act  without  committing  it,  considering  it 
praiseworthy  and  permissible  though  it  be  forbidden.     But 
are  the  clouds  harmed  by  the  barking  of  the  dogs  ?    Just  as 
the  clouds  are  not  harmed  by  the  barking  of  the  dogs,  so 
such  a  man  does  no  harm. 

(Here  the  writing  breaks  off,  at  the  end  of  the  folio 
58b,  and  from  the  following  it  appears  that  several  pages 
are  lost,  and  that  the  author  is  now  talking  of  Mu'ammar.)  2 
......  the  phenomena  of  the  body  came  from  the  acts 

of  the  body  according  to  its  nature.  According  to  him, 
sound  is  the  act  of  bodies  that  are  sonorous  by  nature.  The 
annihilation  of  a  body  is  the  act  of  the  body  from  its  nature. 
\nd  the  healthy  or  unhealthy  condition  of  seed  is,  accord- 
ing to  him,  due  to  the  acts  of  the  seed.  He  also  claimed 
that  the  annihilation  of  a  finite  thing  is  due  to  its  own  act 
from  its  nature.  He  claims,  moreover,  that  in  the  case  of 
phenomena,  Allah  has  neither  action  nor  power.  And  137 
holding  this  view  that  Allah  creates  neither  life  nor  death, 
he  condemns  as  false  Allah's  describing  himself  as  one  who 

1  Ibn-Khallikan,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  22. 

■  Mu'ammar  ibn-'Abbad  al-Sulami.     Shahrastani,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  67 
ct  seq.    Horten,  ibid.,  p.  274  et  seq.    Macdonald,  tbid.,  p.  H3- 

157 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

gives  life  or  causes  death,   for  how  can  he  who  created 
neither  life  nor  death  give  life  or  death? 

His  second  heresy  is  his  idea  that  Allah  created  no  phe- 
nomena whatever.  He  at  the  same  time  denied  the  eternal 
attributes  of  Allah,  just  as  the  rest  of  the  Mu'tazilah  de- 
nied them.  This  heresy  forced  him  to  the  conclusion  that 
Allah  has  no  word,  since  he  could  not  state  that  Allah's 
word  was  an  eternal  attribute,  as  the  Sumiites  and  the  com- 
munity did,  for  he  did  not  ascribe  to  Allah  any  eternal 
attribute.  Nor  could  he  say  that  his  word  was  his  act,  as 
the  rest  of  the  Mu'tazilah  held,  because  Allah,  according  to 
him,  had  not  created  any  phenomena.  The  Koran,  accord- 
ing to  him,  was  the  act  of  a  body  upon  which  the  words 
descended,  but  is  not  an  act  of  Allah,  nor  an  attribute. 
Thus  it  is  not  possible  for  him  to  actually  have  a  word, 
either  in  the  sense  of  an  attribute,  or  in  the  sense  of  an  act. 
If  he  then  has  no  word,  he  has  no  power  to  command,  to 
forbid,  nor  to  impose  obligation.  This  involves  a  denial 
of  divine  obligation,  and  of  the  provisions  of  the  Canon 
Law  and  of  what  others  have  affirmed,  because  he  held 
opinions  leading  thereto. 

His  third  heresy  was  his  assertion  that  every  kind  of 
phenomena  existing  in  the  body  is  endless  in  number.  So 
138  he  said  if  a  thing  moves  through  a  motion  arising  in  itself, 
this  motion  belongs  to  its  bearer  for  the  sake  of  (through) 
an  idea  outside  of  itself.  This  idea,  again,  belongs  to  its 
bearer  for  the  sake  of  (through)  an  idea  outside  of  itself. 
Thus  he  speaks  of  every  idea  belonging  to  its  bearer  for 
the  sake  of  (through)  an  idea  outside  of  it  ad  infinitum. 
Thus  color,  taste  and  smell — as  well  as  any  other  phenom- 
ena— belongs  to  its  bearer  through  an  idea  outside  of  itself. 
This  idea  again  belongs  to  its  bearer  through  an  idea  out- 
side of  itself  ad  infinitum.  Al-Ka'bi,  in  his  treatises,  relates 
how  al-Mu'ammar  claimed  that  motion  is  opposed  to  rest 

158 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARlYAH 

only  through  an  idea  outside  of  it.  In  the  same  way  rest  is 
opposed  to  motion  through  an  idea  outside  of  it,  and  these 
two  ideas  are  opposed  to  ideas  other  than  they.  This  series, 
according  to  him,  may  be  followed  ad  infinitum. 

Now  such  a  view  is  heretical  for  two  reasons.     One  is 
that  he  posits  accidents  that  are  unlimited,  which  neces- 
sitates the  positing  of  accidents  which  Allah  cannot  count— 
which  is  directly  opposed  to  Allah's  saying,  "  And  count- 
eth  all  things  by  number  "  (Surah  72,  v.  28).    The  second 
reason   is   that   his   saying  that  an   unlimited   number  of 
phenomena  have  been  created  leads  him  to  hold  that  the 
body  is  more  powerful  than  Allah.     For,  according  to  him, 
Allah  has  created  nothing  but  bodies,  which  are  finite,  as 
both  we  and  he  hold.     Now,  when  the  body  creates  a  phe- 
nomenon, it  has  in  that  connection  created  phenomena  that 
are  unlimited.     And  naturally  that  which  creates  what  is 
unlimited  must  be  more  powerful  than  that  which  can  only 
create  what  is  limited  in  number.     In  his  treatises  al-Ka'bi 
tries  to  excuse  al-Mu'ammar,  asserting  that  he  was  accus- 
tomed to  say  that  man  has  no  power  of  action  outside  of  his 
will,  the  rest  of  the  phenomena  being  the  work  of  the  body 
acting  according  to  its  nature.    If  this  report  of  his  views 
is  correct,  it  necessarily  follows  that  the  nature,  to  which  is 
ascribed  the  creation  of  the  phenomena,  is  more  powerful 
than  Allah,  for  Allah  produces  only  bodies  that  are  limited,   139 
while  the  nature  of  man  produces  various  kinds  of  phenom- 
ena, every  one  of  which  kind  is  endless  in  number. 

It  ought  further  to  be  said  that  the  view  of  al-Mu'ammar 
in  regard  to  endless  phenomena  opens  the  way  for  those 
who  held  the  doctrines  of  suhur  (appearance)  and  kutnun 
(masking)  against  that  of  the  [orthodox]  Moslems  in  re- 
gard to  the  creation  of  phenomena.  For  the  [orthodox] 
Moslems  inferred  the  creation  of  the  phenomena  in  bodies 
from  the  fact  that  opposing  phenomena  may  succeed  one 

159 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

another  in  bodies.  But  the  followers  of  zuhiir  and  kumun 
denied  the  creation  of  phenomena  and  believed  that  they 
were  inherent  in  bodies,  and  that  whenever  one  phenomenon 
appeared  in  a  body,  its  opposite  was  masked  there,  and  that 
when  a  phenomenon  was  masked  there,  its  opposite  appeared. 
The  Mukassidun  said  to  them :  "  If  a  phenomenon  is  masked 
once  and  appears  once,  its  appearance  after  its  masking  and 
its  masking  after  its  appearance  would  be  due  to  an  idea 
outside  of  it;  and  if  not,  this  idea  in  its  appearing  and  its 
masking  would  need  an  endless  idea  outside  of  it.  But  since 
the  combination  of  endless  phenomena  in  one  body  is  impos- 
sible, their  succession  in  a  body  through  being  created  is 
proved,  and  not  through  successive  masking  and  appearing. 
If,  now,  Mu'ammar  says  that  the  combination  of  unlimited 
phenomena  in  a  body  is  possible,  he  cannot  refute  the  claim 
of  the  followers  of  appearance  and  masking,  that  it  is  pos- 
sible for  endless  phenomena  of  the  kind  called  appearance 
and  masking  to  be  in  one  and  the  same  place."  This  view 
carried  to  its  legitimate  conclusion  leads  to  the  assertion 
that  phenomena  are  eternal — which  is  a  heresy.  And  that 
which  leads  to  such  a  theory  must  also  be  heresy. 
I4°  His  fourth  heresy  is  his  theory  that  man  is  something 
beside  this  sensible  body,  that  he  is  living,  knowing,  able  to 
act  and  possesses  free  will.  But  he  claims  that  it  is  not 
man  himself  who  moves,  or  keeps  quiet,  or  is  colored,  or 
sees,  or  touches,  or  changes  from  place  to  place,  nor  does 
one  place  contain  him  to  the  exclusion  of  another.  If  he 
were  asked,  "  Do  you  say  that  man  is  in  this  body,  or  in  the 
sky,  or  in  the  earth,  or  in  paradise,  or  in  hell?",  he  would 
answer,  "I  do  not  deny  any  of  this,  but  I  assert  that  he  is 
in  the  body  as  something  led,  in  paradise  as  something  given 
delight,  or  in  hell  as  something  given  punishment;  he  is, 
however,  neither  present  nor  contained  in  any  one  of  these 
places,  because  he  has  neither  length,  breadth,  depth,  nor 

160 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

weight."  He  thus  ascribes  attributes  to  man  which  are 
ascribed  to  Allah,  in  that  he  says  that  man  is  living  and 
knowing  and  able  to  act  and  wise,  attributes  which  must 
necessarily  be  applied  to  Allah.  Then  he  denies  that  man 
can  move,  or  be  at  rest,  or  be  hot,  or  cold,  or  wet,  or  dry, 
that  he  possesses  color,  or  weight,  or  taste,  or  smell.  Allah 
also  is  free  from  such  attributes.  And  just  as  he  claims 
that  man,  when  in  the  body,  is  its  manager,  but  is  not  there 
in  the  sense  of  being  present  or  contained,  so,  according  to 
him,  Allah  is  in  every  place,  in  the  sense  that  he  is  managing 
it,  and  knowing  what  is  happening  in  it,  but  not  in  the  sense 
of  being  present  or  contained  in  it.  It  is  almost  as  if  by 
describing  man  as  Allah  is  described,  he  wishes  him  to  be 
worshipped.  He  did  not,  however,  think  it  meet  to  express 
quite  this  opinion,  so  he  merely  said  something  that  would 
naturally  lead  to  it.  Moreover,  this  view  entails  the  idea 
that  it  is  impossible  for  man  to  see  man,  and  therefore  it  fol-  141 
lows  that  the  Companions  did  not  see  the  Prophet  of  Allah, 
a  view  which  is  in  itself  sufficiently  shameful. 

His  fifth  heresy  was  his  view  that  it  is  not  proper  to  say 
of  Allah  that  he  is  ancient,  and  yet  at  the  same  time  de- 
scribing him  as  existent  and  eternal. 

His  sixth  heresy  was  his  refusal  to  say  that  Allah  knows 
himself,  because  he  considers  it  essential  for  the  thing  known 
to  be  separate  from  the  thing  knowing.  This  view  of  his, 
however,  is  proved  false  by  the  fact  that  a  speaker  may 
mention  himself,  because  if  it  is  possible  for  his  own  self 
to  be  mentioned  by  a  speaker,  it  is  also  possible  for  a  knower 
to  know  his  own  self.  Al-Ka'bi  boasted  in  his  writings  to 
the  effect  that  Mu'ammar  was  one  of  his  Mu'tazilah  teach- 
ers. Now  anyone  who  boasts  of  his  likeness  to  the  like  of 
him  can  keep  it,  just  as  the  poet  has  said : 

"  Is  there  any  buyer  as  long  as  Sa'id  is  the  seller? 
Is  there  any  seller  as  long  as  Sa'id  is  the  buyer  ?  " 
161 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

6.  Concerning  the  Bishriyah  among  them.  These  are  the 
followers  of  Bishr  ibn-al-Mu'tamir.1  Some  of  his  brother 
Kadarlyah  condemned  his  views  on  certain  points  in  which 
he  is  considered  right  by  other  Kadarlyah.  For  instance, 
they  condemned  his  view  that  Allah  was  capable  of  so  much 
kindness  that  if  he  showed  it  to  an  infidel,  it  would  make 
that  infidel  involuntarily  a  believer.  They  also  condemned 
his  view  that  if  Allah  had  first  created  the  wise  in  paradise, 
thus  favoring  them,  it  would  have  been  better  for  them. 
They  also  condemned  his  view  that  if  Allah  should  know 
that  by  lengthening  the  life  of  a  man,  that  slave  would  be- 
come a  believer,  then  to  lengthen  his  life  would  be  better 
for  him  than  to  have  him  die  a  heretic.  Moreover,  they 
142  condemned  his  view  that  Allah  does  not  cease  desiring;  and 
also  his  view  that  if  Allah  knows  that  a  certain  act  is  to  be 
committed  by  a  man  and  does  not  forbid  it,  then  he  has  de- 
sired its  occurrence.  In  these  five  views  which  the  Basrah 
Mu'tazilah  condemned,  Bishr  was  right  while  in  reality 
those  who  condemned  him  were  themselves  worthy  of  con- 
demnation. All  the  other  matters,  however,  are  hateful 
heresies,  and  we  condemn  Bishr  as  an  unbeliever.  First  of 
all,  we  condemn  his  view  that  Allah  is  not  a  friend  to  the 
believer  in  the  state  of  his  belief,  nor  an  enemy  to  an  un- 
believer in  the  state  of  his  unbelief.  It  was  necessary  to 
condemn  him  for  this,  since  it  is  contrary  to  the  view  of  all 
Moslems  as  well  as  our  immediate  followers ;  for  we  say  that 
Allah  does  not  cease  being  a  friend  to  him  whom  he  knows 
to  have  been  his  friend,  while  he  was  alive ;  and  an  enemy  to 
him  whom  he  knows  to  have  been  an  unbeliever  during  his 
life  and  to  have  died  in  his  unbelief.  He  is  therefore  his 
enemy  before  his  unbelief,  in  the  state  of  his  unbelief,  and 
after  his  death.  As  to  these  main  points,  the  Mu'tazilah,  all 
except  Bishr,  held  that  Allah  is  not  a  friend  to  a  man  before 

1  See  note  on  page  134. 

162 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

the  existence  of  obedience  in  him  was  possible ;  it  is  only  in 
the  state  of  obedience  that  he  becomes  his  friend.  In  the 
same  way  he  is  an  enemy  to  the  unbeliever  only  in  the  state 
of  his  unbelief;  moreover,  if  the  believer  returned  to  his  un- 
belief, Allah  becomes  his  enemy  after  having  been  his  friend, 
according  to  them.  Bishr,  however,  claimed  that  Allah  is 
not  the  friend  of  the  obedient  in  the  state  of  the  existence 
of  his  obedience,  nor  an  enemy  to  the  unbeliever  in  the  state 
of  the  existence  of  his  unbelief.  He  is  only  friendly  to  the 
obedient  in  the  second  state  where  obedience  exists,1  and  he 
is  the  enemy  of  the  unbeliever  only  in  the  second  state  where 
his  unbelief  exists.  He  gave  as  proof  of  this,  that  if  it  is 
right  that  Allah  should  be  a  friend  to  the  obedient  [only]  143 
in  the  state  of  his  obedience,  and  an  enemy  to  him  [only]  in 
the  state  of  his  unbelief,  then  it  is  right  to  reward  the  obe- 
dient in  the  state  of  his  obedience,  and  to  punish  the  unbe- 
liever in  the  state  of  his  unbelief.  But  our  followers  say : 
"If  Allah  does  so,  it  is  right."  Bishr,  however,  said  that 
if  this  [conclusion]  is  right,  then  it  must  follow  that  the 
unbeliever  can  be  transformed  in  his  state  of  unbelief.  We 
say  that  if  Allah  does  so,  it  is  right. 

The  second  of  Bishr's  heresies  is  the  fact  that  he  exag- 
gerated his  view  about  reproduction  to  such  an  extent  that 
he  claimed  it  possible  for  a  man  to  create  color  and  taste 
and  smell  and  sight  and  hearing  and  the  rest  of  the  sensa- 
tions according  to  the  method  of  reproduction,  provided  he 
is  the  author  of  that  which  causes  them.  The  same  is  true 
of  his  view  of  heat  and  cold,  wetness  and  dryness.  Our 
own  followers  and  the  rest  of  the  Mu'tazilah  declared  him 
a  heretic,  because  of  his  assertion  that  man  can  create  color, 
taste,  smell  and  the  sensations. 

His  third  heresy  is  his  theory  that  Allah  may  forgive  a 

1  i.  e.  he  is  not  his  friend  before  he  becomes  obedient,  nor  his  enemy 
before  he  becomes  disobedient. 

163 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

man  his  sins  and  then  change  his  mind  about  such  forgive- 
ness and  punish  him  when  the  man  is  again  disobedient. 
Bishr  was  questioned  about  this :  "  If  an  unbeliever  had 
turned  from  his  unbelief,  and  drank  wine  after  having  re- 
pented from  his  unbelief,  without  considering  it  legal  to 
drink  wine,  and  death  should  seize  him  before  he  had  re- 
pented from  his  drinking  of  wine,  would  Allah  punish  him 
on  the  last  day  for  his  unbelief  for  which  he  repented  ?"    He 
said  "  yes."     It  was  then  said  to  him:  ''According  to  this, 
then,  the  punishment  for  such  a  sin  on  the  part  of  those  who 
are  of  the  Moslem  community  is  like  the  punishment  of  the 
unbeliever."     And  Bishr  had  to  accept  this  deduction. 
I44       His  fourth  heresy  is  his  theory  that  if  Allah  punished  a 
baby,  he  would  be  acting  unjustly  towards  it  in  meting  out 
such  punishment,  for  if  Allah  does  this,  the  baby  would 
have   to  be   grown   up,    sensible,   and    deserving   of    pun- 
ishment.    This  is  the  same  as  if  he  said  that  Allah  has 
power  to  act  unjustly,  and  if  he  acts  unjustly,  then,  indeed 
through  this  injustice  he  becomes  just !    Thus  the  beginning 
of  this  theory  contradicts  the  conclusion.     Our  followers 
say  that  Allah  has  the  power  to  punish  babies;  if  he  does 
so,  his  act  must  be  a  just  one.     Their  views  in  this  matter 
are  not  contradictory,  but  Bishr's  view  is. 

His  fifth  heresy  is  his  view  that  [when  a  body  moves  from 
one  place  to  another]  motion  exists,  but  not  in  the  body, 
either  as  it  is  in  the  first  or  the  second  place ;  but  that  the 
body  moves  through  it  from  the  first  to  the  second  place. 
This  view  is  unreasonable  in  itself.  Theologians  before  him 
disagreed  as  to  whether  motion  is  an  "  unsubstantial  real- 
ity "  (ma'na)  or  not.  Those  who  do  not  believe  in  phe- 
nomena said  no;  while  those  who  believed  in  phenomena 
differ  over  the  time  of  the  occurrence  of  motion,  some  of 
them  claiming  that  it  starts  in  the  body  when  the  body  is  in 
the  first  place,  and  the  body  then  passes  through  it  from  the 

164 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

first  to  the  second  place.  To  this  agree  al-Nazzam  and  abu- 
Shimr  al-MurjiV  Others  said  that  motion  exists  in  the 
body  when  the  latter  has  reached  the  second  place,  because 
it  is  the  first  time  the  body  exists  in  the  second  place.  This 
is  the  view  of  abu-al-Hudhail  and  al-Jubba'i  and  his  son 
abu-Hashim.  Our  sheikh  abu-1-Hasan  al-Ash'ari  says 
about  this :  "  Some  of  them  say  that  motion  is  two  sub- 
stances in  two  [separate]  places.  One  of  them  occurs  in  the 
moving  body  while  it  is  in  the  first  place,  the  second  occurs 
in  the  body  when  it  is  in  the  second  place."  This  is  the  view 
of  al-Ruwandi2  and  also  of  our  sheikh  abu-al-' Abbas  al- 
Kalanisl.3  The  view  of  Bishr  ibn-al-Mu'tamar  differs  from 
these  views  because  he  claims  that  motion  takes  place  while 
the  body  is  neither  in  the  first  nor  the  second  place,  although 
we  know  that  there  is  no  state  between  the  first  and  the 
second.  If  this  view  is  unreasonable  even  for  him,  how  can 
it  be  reasonable  for  others  ? 

7.  Concerning  the  Hishamlyah.  These  are  the  followers 
of  Hisham  ibn-'Amr  al-Futi.4  His  heresies  follow  in  succes- 
sion his  [initial]  heresy  about  predestnation.  Among  them 
is  the  fact  that  he  borbids  men  to  say  (Surah  3,  v.  167)  : 
"  Our  Allah  is  our  sufficiency,  and  he  is  our  best  guardian 
[wakil]"  because  he  does  not  consider  it  right  to  call  Allah 
a  guardian.  But  the  Koran  gives  this  quality  to  Allah,  and 
it  is  also  mentioned  in  the  Sunnah  which  has  been  handed 

1  Muhammad  Badr  points  this  abu-Shimr,  but  no  such  man  is  men- 
tioned by  the  leading  writers  on  these  heresies,  while  ShahrastanI  men- 
tions abu-Shdmir,  a  Murji',  vol.  i,  p.  160  et  seq.,  Horten  mentions  this 
same  man  on  p.  304.  As  abu-Shamir  was  also  a  pupil  of  al-Nazzam  it 
seems  justifiable  to  conclude  that  this  is  the  man  to  whom  Baghdad! 
is  referring. 

1  Horten,  ibid.,  p.  350  et  seq.     Ibn-Khallikan,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  76. 

3  Horten,  ibid.,  p.  375- 

4  ShahrastanI,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  74- 

165 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

down  concerning  the  ninety-nine  names  of  Allah.  If  this 
name  cannot  be  applied  to  Allah,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  it 
is  written  in  the  Koran,  and  handed  down  in  the  authentic 
Sunnah,  then  what  other  names  should  be  applied  to  him? 
Our  followers  used  to  wonder  at  the  Basrah  Mu'tazilah  who 
applied  names  to  Allah  that  were  not  mentioned  in  the  Koran 
and  the  Sunnah,  even  if  there  is  analogy  for  them.  Their 
wonder  increased  still  more  when  al-Futi  forbade  them  to 
apply  to  Allah  those  attributes  which  were  mentioned  of 
him  in  the  Koran  and  the  Sunnah. 

Al-Khaiyat  defended  al-Futi  by  saying  that  Hisham  used 
to  say :  "  Our  sufficiency  is  in  Allah,  he  is  the  best  to  depend 
upon  [mntawakkal  alaihi]"  in  place  of  "guardian/'  He 
claimed  that  the  word  guardian  implied  someone  above 
him  (to  make  him  guardian).  This,  however,  is  a  sign  of 
the  ignorance  of  Hisham  and  of  him  who  defended  him  by 
146  resorting  to  the  meanings  of  nouns  in  the  language.  The 
word  guardian  really  means  "  the  one  who  is  sufficient," 
because  he  suffices  the  one  under  his  guardianship  in  what 
is  given  him  to  guard.  This  is  the  meaning  of  his  say- 
ing, "  Our  sufficiency  is  in  Allah,  and  he  is  the  best  guar- 
dian." And  also  the  meaning  of  "  our  sufficiency  "  is  our 
adequacy.  It  is  therefore  necessary  that  what  follows  the 
word  "  best  "  should  agree  with  the  word  that  precedes  it, 
as  when  we  say  "Allah  is  our  supplier,  and  he  is  the  best 
supplier,"  we  do  not  say  "Allah  is  our  supplier,  and  he  is 
the  best  forgiver."  Besides,  Allah  said,  "  He  who  depends 
on  Allah,  Allah  is  his  sufficiency,  i.  c.  his  satisfier."  Guar- 
dian [wakll]  may  also  mean  in  the  Koran  "  one  in  charge 
of  us,"  "Say  I  am  not  in  charge  of  you"  (Surah  6,  v. 
66),  i.  e.  your  protector;  and  the  opposite  of  protector 
would  be  a  stupid  man.  If  guardian  means  protector,  and 
if  Allah  is  a  satisfier  and  a  protector,  then  we  should  not 
forbid  the  use  of  the  word  guardian  among  his  actual  names. 

166 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

The  remarkable  thing  is  that  Hisham  permitted  this  name 
for  Allah  to  be  written  and  read  in  the  Koran.  But  he  did 
not  permit  its  use  outside  of  the  Koran. 

The  second  of  al-Futfs  heresies  is  his  prohibition  of  the 
use  of  many  things  uttered  in  the  Koran.  He  also  pro- 
hibited men  from  saying  that  Allah  unites  the  hearts  of  be- 
lievers and  causes  the  evil  to  err.  This  is  in  opposition  to 
the  words  of  Allah,  "Hadst  thou  spent  all  the  riches  of  the 
earth,  thou  couldst  not  have  united  their  hearts;  but  Allah 
hath  united  them"  (Surah  8,  v.  64),  and  to  his  words,  "But 
the  wicked  shall  he  cause  to  err"  (Surah  14,  v.  32),  and  to 
his  words,  "  But  none  will  he  mislead  thereby  except  the 
wicked  "  (Surah  2,  v.  27).  Moreover,  he  rejected  the  say-  147 
ing  in  the  Koran  that  Allah  blinds  the  unbelievers.  'Ubad 
ibn-Sulaiman  al-'Amri  ('Umari?)  agreed  with  this  error, 
and  forbade  men  to  say  that  Allah  created  the  unbelievers, 
because  the  word  unbeliever  is  a  name  for  two  things,  man 
and  his  unbelief,  but  according  to  him  Allah  is  not  the 
creator  of  his  unbelief.  On  this  analogy,  it  follows  that 
one  should  not  say  that  Allah  created  the  believer,  because 
the  word  believer  is  a  name  for  two  things,  man  and  belief, 
but  Allah,  according  to  him,  is  not  the  creator  of  man's  be- 
lief. Similarly  one  should  never  say,  "  one  has  killed  an 
unbeliever  or  has  struck  him,"  because  the  word  unbeliever 
refers  to  both  man  and  his  unbelief,  and  unbelief  cannot  be 
killed  or  struck.  'Ubad  also  rejected  the  saying  that  Allah 
"  is  the  third  to  every  two,  and  the  fourth  to  every  three," 
which  contradicts  the  saying  of  Allah  in  the  Koran :  "Three 
persons  speak  not  privately  together  but  he  is  their  fourth, 
nor  five  but  he  is  their  sixth"  (Surah  58,  v.  8).  He  also  re- 
jected the  saying  that  Allah  increases  the  days  of  the  unbe- 
liever, and  this  in  spite  of  his  word  in  the  Koran :  "  We  only 
give  them  length  of  days  that  they  may  increase  their  sins  " 
{Surah  3,  v.  179).    If  'Ubad  took  this  error  from  his  pre- 

167 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

ceptor  Hisham,  it  is  like  the  case  of  'Asa  coming  from 
'Aslyah,1  "  the  snake  gives  birth  to  naught  but  a  snake." 
But  if  this  assertion  of  his  is  original,  then  the  student 
would  have  drawn  this  from  his  teacher  by  analogy,  for 
the  teacher  rejected  the  word  guardian  and  guarantor  from 
among  the  names  of  Allah. 
148  The  third  of  al-Fiiti's  heresies  is  his  view  concerning 
phenomena.  He  held  that  nothing  in  them  predicates  any- 
thing about  Allah.  His  companion  'Ubad  said  the  same, 
both  claiming  that  the  "  separation  of  the  sea,"  and  the 
"  changing  of  a  stick  into  a  snake,"  and  the  "  splitting  of 
the  moon,"  and  the  "  secret  of  the  twilight,"  and  the 
"walking  on  the  waters"  (see  above,  page  156)  do  not 
verify  the  Prophet's  claim  to  prophecy.  Al-Futi  claims  that 
the  evidences  supposed  to  come  from  Allah  must  be  per- 
ceptible, just  as  bodies  are  perceptible,  and  are  therefore 
evidences  for  Allah.  They  are  phenomena  which  can  be 
known  through  deductive  proofs.  But  if  Allah  is  to  be 
made  evident  by  this,  these  evidences  must  each  have  an- 
other evidence  to  prove  them,  and  so  on  ad  infinitum.  It 
was  objected  that  if  he  held  to  such  an  evidence,  he  would 
have  to  say  that  phenomena  do  not  prove  anything,  nor  do 
they  even  prove  a  basis  for  a  legal  decision ;  because  if  they 
proved  a  thing  or  a  decision,  in  proving  it  they  would  need 
to  prove  the  truth  of  the  evidence  used  in  bringing  such 
proof  and  each  evidence  must  have  another  evidence  to 
prove  it,  and  so  on  ad  infinitum.  And  if  phenomena  prove 
nothing,  and  give  no  decision,  then  the  proof  of  the  word 
of  Allah  and  the  word  of  the  prophet  of  Allah  about  that 
which  is  legal  and  that  which  is  illegal,  and  that  which 
is  promised  and  that  which  is  threatened,  is  abrogated. 
Among  phenomena,   however,   are   some  whose   existence 

1  Muhammad  Badr  in  a  footnote  says  that  'Asa  is  the  name  of  a  horse 
and  'Aslyah  is  the  mother  of  that  horse. 

168 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARlYAH 

is  known  by  necessity,  such  as  colors,  tastes,  smells,  motion 
and  quiet;  it  necessarily  follows  that  these  known  phe- 
nomena are  evidence  for  Allah  because  they  are  percep- 
tible, just  as  bodies  are  evidence  for  Allah  bcause  they 
are  perceptible.  Now  if  al-Futi  says  that  phenomena  are 
not  perceptible,  because  those  who  deny  phenomena  have  149 
doubted  their  existence,  one  can  say :  "  The  Najjariyah  and 
the  Darariyah  have  doubted  the  existence  of  the  body  which 
was  not  a  phenomenon,  for  they  asserted  that  bodies  are  a 
conglomerate  of  phenomena."  And  arguing  from  analogy, 
it  follows  that  bodies  cannot  be  known  of  necessity,  and  if 
[break  in  text]. 

His  fourth  heresy  is  his  view  concerning  "  interruption 
and  continuation."  He  maintained  that  if  a  man  performs 
the  ablutions  for  prayer  and  begins  praying,  thus  drawing 
near  to  Allah  with  the  determination  to  complete  the  prayer, 
and  then  recites  and  genuflects  and  prays  to  Allah  in  the 
proper  manner,  but  interrupts  it  before  the  end,  the  begin- 
ning of  the  prayer  as  well  as  its  end  is  sin,  for  Allah  has 
forbidden  him  this,  and  has  prohibited  it.  Nevertheless  he 
has  no  way  of  knowing  before  the  beginning  that  he  is 
going  to  commit  a  sin  and  so  avoiding  it.  The  community 
before  his  time,  however,  agreed  that  the  part  of  the  prayer 
which  has  been  performed  is  an  act  of  obedience  to  Allah, 
even  though  the  prayer  is  not  completed,  as  for  example,  if 
he  died  during  it,  what  he  had  already  performed  would  be 
an  act  of  obedience,  even  if  the  whole  prayer  was  not  com- 
pleted. 

His  fifth  heresy  is  his  denial  that  'Uthman  was  besieged 
and  was  murdered  by  conquest  and  force.  He  claims  that  a 
small  band  surprised  and  killed  him  without  a  regular  siege. 
And  he  who  rejects  the  view  that  'Uthman  was  besieged, 
in  spite  of  the  successive  traditions  about  it  which  have 
been  handed  down,  is  like  him  who  rejects  the  battles  of 

169 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Badr  and  'Uhud,  in  spite  of  the  successive  traditions  which 
have  been  handed  down  about  them.  He  is  also  like  the 
man  who  rejects  the  miracles  about  which  traditions  have 
been  handed  down. 

His  sixth  heresy  is  the  view  which  he  expresses  in  the 
chapter  on  the  "  Community";  that  when  the  community 
comes  to  a  consensus  of  opinion,  forsaking  tyranny  and  cor- 
ruption, then  it  needs  an  Imam  to  manage  it ;  and  that  when 
it  rebels  and  sins  and  kills  its  Imam,  the  Imamship  should  not 
be  fixed  upon  anyone  under  these  conditions.  By  that  he 
meant  to  attack  the  Imamship  of  'All,  because  the  Imamship 
was  given  to  him  during  a  rebellion,  and  after  the  killing 
of  the  Imam  preceding  him.  This  agreed  with  the  view  of 
their  al-Asamm,1  that  the  Imamship  should  remain  only  with 
him  upon  whom  the  consensus  of  the  community  rested. 
By  this  view  he  only  wished  to  attack  the  Imamship  of  'All, 
because  the  community  did  not  agree  about  him,  for  the 
Syrians  were  championing  someone  else  until  'AH  died. 
While  rejecting  the  Imamship  of  'AH  he  accepted  that  of 
Mu'awiyah,  because  after  the  killing  of  'All  the  people  were 
unanimous  about  him.  The  Rafidah,  who  inclined  to  the 
Mu'tazilah  views,  were  thoroughly  satisfied  with  the  attack 
of  the  sheikhs  of  the  Mu'tazilah  on  the  Imamship  of  'AH, 
after  the  doubt  of  their  leader,  Wasil,  about  the  testimony 
of  'AH  and  his  followers. 

His  seventh  heresy  is  his  view  that  whoever  says  that 
paradise  and  hell  are  created,  should  be  condemned  as  a 
heretic.  His  successors  among  the  Mu'tazilah  doubt  the 
existence  of  paradise  and  hell  to-day,  but  they  do  not  con- 
demn the  man  who  says  that  they  are  created.  Those  con- 
vinced of  the  creation  of  paradise  and  hell  condemn  those 
who  deny  their  existence,  and  they  swear  by  Allah  that  he 

7  Horten,  ibid.,  p.  298. 

170 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

who  denies  them  will  not  enter  paradise  and  will  not  be 
freed  from  hell. 

His  eighth  heresy  is  his  denial  of  the  marriage  of  the 
virgins  in  paradise.     He  who  denies  this  is  not  worthy  to 
enter  paradise,  how  much  less  to  marry  a  virgin  there! 
Besides  the  errors  which  we  have  recounted  of  him,  al-Futi 
believes  in  killing  those  who  differed  from  him  with  secret 
cunning,  even  if  they  belong  to  the  Moslem  community.   The   151 
Sunnites  said  of  al-Futi  and  his  followers  that  their  blood 
and  their  possessions  belonged  to  the  Moslems,  and  that 
they  had  the  usual  right  to  a  fifth  of  the  spoils.    Nor  should 
retaliation  be  demanded  of  one  who  kills  one  of  them  nor 
blood-wit  nor  atonement.     Indeed,  a  certain  rank  and  sta- 
tion is  to  be  awarded  to  the  one  killing  him,  for  which 
praise  be  to  Allah. 

8.  Concerning  the  Murddrlyah  among  them.  These  are 
the  followers  of  Tsa  ibn-Sabih,  known  as  abii-Musa  al- 
Murdar.1  He  was  called  the  monk  of  the  Mu'tazilah;  the 
surname  suited  him,  though  the  term  was  taken  from  the 
Christian  monks.  His  surname  al-Murdar  was  also  well 
suited.  In  general,  the  verse  may  be  applied  to  him: 
"  Thine  eyes  seldom  see  a  man  whose  appearance  does  not 
remind  you  of  his  surname." 

This  Murdar  claimed  that  men  had  the  power  to  produce 
something  similar  to  the  Koran,  and  even  something  more 
eloquent,  as  al-Nazzam  had  said.  But  in  this  way  they 
show  stubborn  opposition  to  the  word  of  Allah :  "  Say, 
verily  were  men  and  Jinn  assembled  to  produce  the  like  of 
this  Koran;  they  could  not  produce  its  like,  though  the  one 
should  help  the  other"  (Surah  17,  v.  90)-  In  addition  to 
his  various  errors,  al-Murdar  condemned  the  person  in 
close  communication  with  a  Sultan,  claiming  that  he  can 

»  Shahrastani,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  jrc,  musclar.    Horten,  ibid.,  index,  p.  642. 

171 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

neither   inherit   nor   can   he   bequeath.      His   predecessors 
among  the  Mu'tazilah,  who  agreed  with  him  as  regards  fate 
and  secession,  said  of  the  person  holding  communication 
with  a  Sultan,  that  he  was  a  shameful  person,  but  could  not 
be  called  either  a  believer  or  an  unbeliever.     Murdar,  how- 
ever, held  that  such  a  person  was  an  unbeliever.     It  is  a 
152  wonder  that  the  Sultan  of  his  time  refrained  from  killing 
him,  considering  his  condemnation  of  the  Sultan  himself 
and  of  those  who  associated  with  him.     He  also  claimed 
that  Allah  could  act  tyrannically  and  lie;  for  if  he  really 
carried  out  what  he  was  able  to  do  in  the  way  of  tyranny 
and  lying,  Allah  would  become  a  tyrannous  and  lying  God. 
Abu-Zufar  reports  of  al-Murdar  that  he  admitted  that  a 
deed  could  exist  which  was  the  result  of  two  created  doers, 
the  deed  being  created  in  the  way  of  generation.     He  held 
this  view  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  he  rejected  the  opinion  of 
the  Sunnites  that  a  deed  could  result  from  two  doers,  one 
of  them  being  creator  and  the  other  acquirer.     Al-Murdar 
also  claimed  that  he  who  admitted  that  Allah  could  be  seen 
by  the  eye  though  without  form,  is  an  unbeliever,  while  he 
who  doubts  that  such  a  man  is  an  unbeliever,  is  an  unbe- 
liever himself ;  and  so  is  the  man  who  has  doubts  of  the 
man  who  doubts,  and  so  on  ad  infinitum.     The  rest  of  the 
Mu'tazilah  agreed  to  condemn  only  him  who  admitted  that 
Allah  could  be  seen  when  man  confronted  him,  or  when 
the  rays  of  the  sight  of  the  seer  reached  the  seen.     Those 
who  assert  that  there  is  sight,  are  united  in  condemning 
al-Murdar,  as  well  as  those  who  doubt  his  condemnation. 
The  Mu'tazilah  report  that  when  death  came  to  al-Murdar 
he  gave  the  dying  command  that  his  goods  should  be  given 
as  alms  and  that  none  of  his  possessions  were  to  be  given 
to  his  heirs.    Abu-al-Husain  al-Khaiyat  tried  to  excuse  him 
for  this,  saying :  "The  right  to  some  of  his  goods  was  ques- 
tionable, and  the  poor  had  a  claim  on  them."    By  this  excuse 

172 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

he  only  proved  that  al-Murdar  was  a  robber  and  a  betrayer 
of  the  poor.    And  the  robber,  according  to  the  Mu'tazilah  is 
a  shameless  person,  condemned  to  eternal  hell.    The  rest  of 
the  Mu'tazilah  condemned  him  because  of  his  view  about 
the  generation  of  one  deed  by  two  creators.     Al-Murdar 
himself  condemned  abu-al-Hudhail  for  his  view  about  the 
annihilation  of  the  powers  of  Allah.     He  wrote  a  book  on 
this,  and  he  condemned  his  own  teacher  Bishr  ibn-al-Mu'ta-   153 
mar  for  his  view  about  the  creation  of  colors,  tastes,  smells 
and  perceptions.    He  also  condemned  al-Nazzam's  view  that 
created  things  are  the  deed  of  Allah.    This,  he  said,  would 
necessitate  the  acceptance  of  the  views  of  the  Christians, 
namely,  that  "  the  Messiah,  the  son  of  Allah,  was  a  creation 
of  Allah."    This  would  make  of  him  a  Mu'tazilah  in  monk- 
ish dress !    He  condemned  his  sheikhs,  and  his  sheikhs  con- 
demned him.    Both  parties  are  justified  in  condemning  each 
other. 

9.     Concerning  the  Ja'fanyah.     These  are  the  followers 
of  two  Ja'fars  among  them,  one  is  Ja'far  ibn-Harb  *  and 
the  other  is  Ja'far  ibn-Mubashshir.     Both  of  them  attained 
the  heights  of  error  and  the  depths  of  ignorance.     As  to 
Ja'far  ibn-Mubashshir,  he  claimed  that  among  the  corrupt 
of  this  community  there  are  some  who  are  worse  than  the 
Jews,  Christians,  Magians  and  Zindiks.2    This  was  in  spite 
of  his  view  that  these  same  corrupt  persons  were  unitar- 
ians, and  neither  believers  nor  unbelievers.     He  thus  made 
the  unitarian  who  is  not  an  unbeliever  worse  than  the  infidel 
dualist.     The  least  we  can  oppose  to  this  view  of  his  is  to 
say  to  him :  "According  to  us,  thou  art  worse  than  all  un- 
believers on  the  face  of  the  earth."     He  also  claimed  that 

1  Only  alluded  to  by  Shahrastani.  Both  of  the  Ja'fars  are  to  be  found 
in  Mas'udI,  Les  Prairies  d'Or,  vol.  v,  p.  443  and  vol.  vii,  p.  231.  Horten, 
ibid.,  pp.  200,  295. 

2  A  Thanawiyah  or  dualist,  also  applied  to  an  unbeliever. 

173 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

the  consensus  of  the  companions  to  the  effect  that  he  who 
drinks  spirituous  wine  should  be  beaten,  is  wrong,  because 
their  agreement  is  reached  through  speculation  (not  given 
in  the  Koran  or  tradition).  Ja'far  shares  this  heresy  of  his 
with  the  Najadat  among  the  Khawarij,  who  condemn  pun- 
ishment for  the  use  of  liquor.  The  theologians  of  the  com- 
munity unite  in  condemning  him  who  rejects  the  punish- 
ment for  drinking  raw  wine,  they  differ  only  about  nabldh,1 
provided  one  does  not  get  drunk  from  it.  If  one  does, 
however,  get  drunk  from  it,  then,  according  to  the  view  of 
the  followers  of  speculation  and  tradition,  one  deserves 
punishment  in  spite  of  those  who  disagree  with  this  view. 
154  Ibn-Mubashshir  also  claimed  that  he  who  steals  a  single 
grain,  or  even  something  less,  is  corrupt,  and  is  condemned 
to  hell.  In  this  he  differs  from  his  predecessors  who  main- 
tained that  minor  sins  may  be  forgiven,  if  their  author 
avoids  the  major  ones.  He  also  claimed  that  the  condem- 
nation of  the  guilty  to  hell-fire  can  be  inferred  by  mental 
processes,  thereby  differing  from  his  predecessors,  that  such 
a  thing  was  known  through  the  law  and.  not  through  reason. 
Moreover,  he  claims  that  if  a  man  send  to  a  Avoman,  asking 
her  to  marry  him,  and  she  come  to  him,  and  he  take  and 
possess  her  without  a  contract,  she  is  not  to  be  punished, 
because  she  came  to  him  with  the  idea  of  being  married. 
But  the  punishment  must  fall  upon  the  man,  because  he  in- 
tended fornication.  This  ignorant  man  did  not  know  that 
she  who  gives  in  to  fornication  is  a  fornicator  unless  she  is 
forced.  The  legists  differ  only  about  a  man  who  forces  a 
woman  to  commit  fornication,  some  holding  that  the  woman 
should  have  a  dowry  and  the  man  be  punished.  Al-ShafVl 
and  the  legists  of  al-Hijaz  agree  about  this.  Some  with- 
hold the  punishment  of  the  man  because  they  consider 
that  the  dowry  is  sufficient  punishment  for  him.     But  not 

1  Date-wine. 

174 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

one  of  the  early  Moslems  thought  it  right  to  withhold  pun- 
ishment from  a  woman  who  gives  in  to  fornication,  which 
was  ibn-Mubashshir's  view.  The  opposition  of  the  con- 
sensus is  sufficient  shame  for  him.  As  for  Ja'far  ibn-Harb, 
he  shared  in  the  errors  of  his  preceptor,  al-Murdar,  and  also 
added  his  view  to  the  effect  that  a  part  of  the  whole  is  dif- 
ferent from  the  whole.  This  amounts  to  saying  that  the 
whole  is  different  from  itself,  since  all  parts  of  it  are  dif- 
ferent from  it.  He  also  claimed  that  what  is  forbidden  by 
the  mind  has  power  over  (that)  mind,  but  has  no  power 
over  another  thing.  This  is  what  al-Sha'bi 1  said  of  him 
in  his  treatises.  On  this  basis  it  was  necessary  that  he 
should  hold  that  he  who  knows  a  thing  does  not  know  it!  155 
'Abd-al-Kahir  says :  "  Ibn-Harb  wrote  a  book  explaining 
his  errors ;  but  we  have  refuted  his  book,  by  a  book  called 
Harb  (war)  against  ibn-Harb,  and  in  it,  by  the  help  of 
Allah  and  his  gifts,  we  refute  its  bases  and  its  principles. 

10.  Concerning  the  Iskaflyah  among  them.  These  are  the 
followers  of  Muhammad  ibn-'Abdallah  al-Iskafi.2  He  took 
his  errors  about  predestination  from  Ja'far  ibn-Harb,  but 
came  to  differ  ever  certain  of  his  deductions.  He  claimed 
that  to  Allah  can  be  attributed  the  power  to  oppress  chil- 
dren and  madmen,  but  not  those  who  have  their  full  senses. 
He  disagreed  with  the  view  of  al-Nazzam,  according  to 
which  Allah  had  not  the  power  to  act  unjustly  or  to  lie. 
He  likewise  disagreed  with  the  view  of  those  of  his  prede- 
cessors who  hold  that  Allah  could  practice  injustice  and  lie, 
but  does  not  do  so  because  he  knows  that  they  are  both 
abominations,  and  that  he  can  do  without  them.  Between 
these  two  views  he  took  a  middle  course,  according  to  which 

1  Misprint  in  Baghdadl  for  al-Shafi'I. 

2Horten,  ibid.,  p.  299  et  seq.     Mas'udi,  ibid.,  vol.  vi,  p.  58;  vol.  vii, 
P-  231. 

175 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

he  claimed  that  Allah  has  the  power  to  act  unjustly  only  to 
those  who  have  no  mind,  but  not  to  those  who  have  their 
senses.  His  predecessors  condemned  him  for  this,  and  he 
condemned  them  for  differing  from  him.  He  became  so 
abstruse  in  his  heresy  as  to  say  that  it  could  be  said  that 
Allah  spoke  to  his  subjects,  but  that  it  could  not  be  said  that 
he  spoke  with  them.  Moreover  he  calls  Allah  the  addressor 
but  not  the  conversor.  He  claimed  that  in  using  the  word 
conversor  it  would  mean  that  the  word  arises  in  him,  which 
is  not  the  case  with  the  addressor.  Just  as  the  use  of  the 
word  "  who  sets  something  in  motion "  implies  that  the 
motion  commences  in  him,  so  does  the  expression  "  who 
converses  "  imply  that  the  speaking  commences  with  him. 
We  believe  this  to  be  true;  the  word  of  Allah  we  believe 
originates  with  him.  As  to  his  predecessors  among  the 
Kadarivah,  verily  they  would  say  to  him :  "  This  excuse  of 
156  yours  forces  you  to  conclude  that  that  part  of  the  body  of 
man  that  4  speaks  ?  is  the  tongue.  This  is  enough  because, 
according  to  you,  the  word  dwells  in  the  tongue.  You  must, 
indeed,  accept  this  absurdity  that  applies  the  name  of  the 
speaker  to  a  thing,  because  the  word,  according  to  you  and 
the  rest  of  the  Mu'tazilah,  is  composed  of  letters,  and  it  is 
not  possible  for  one  letter  to  be  a  word.  The  place  of  each 
letter  among  the  letters  of  the  word  is  different  from  the 
place  of  the  rest  of  the  letters.  Your  reasoning  would, 
therefore,  mean  that  man  could  not  be  a  speaker,  nor  could 
any  part  of  him  be  a  speaker.  And  according  to  your  asser- 
tion, '  Allah  is  not  the  speaker  because  the  word  does  not 
arise  within  him  '." 

Some  of  the  Mu'tazilah  glorified  al-Iskafi,  by  claiming 
that  when  Muhammad  ibn-al-Hasan  saw  him  walking,  he 
dismounted  from  his  horse.  Evidently  this  is  a  lie,  because 
al-Iskafi  did  not  live  at  the  time  of  Muhammad  ibn-al- 
Hasan.  for  ibn-al-Hasan  died  in  al-Rai  during  the  caliphate 

176 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

of  Karun  al-Rashid,  while  al-Iskafi  was  not  alive  in  the 
time  of  al-Rashid;  and  even  if  he  had  been  alive  in  the  time 
of  Muhammad,  Muhammad  would  not  have  dismounted 
from  his  horse  for  a  man  whom  he  considered  a  heretic. 
Hisham  ibn-'Ubaidallah  al-Razi  reported  as  the  word  of 
Muhammad  ibn-al-Hasan  that  whoever  follows  a  Mu'ta- 
zilah  in  prayer,  his  prayers  must  be  repeated.  Hisham  also 
reported  of  Yahya  ibn-Aktham,1  who  had  it  from  abu- 
Yusuf,  that  he  was  questioned  about  the  Mu'tazilah  and 
said,  "  They  are  Zindiks."  Al-Shafi'i  has  pointed  out  in  his 
book  Al-Kiyas  his  refusal  to  accept  the  testimony  of  the  wit- 
ness of  the  Mu'tazilah  and  the  people  led  astray  by  their  de- 
sires [AM  al-Ahwa].  In  this  question  Malik  and  the  legal 
authorities  of  al-Madinah  agree.  If  that  is  so,  how  could 
the  Imams  of  Islam,  who  condemned  the  Kadariyah,  honor 
them  by  dismounting  for  them  ? 

ii.  Concerning  the  ThmMmlyah  among  them.  These  are  157 
the  followers  of  Thamamah  ibn-Ashras  al-Numairi,2  one  of 
their  freedmen.  He  was  the  leader  of  the  Kadariyah  in  the 
time  of  al-Ma'mun,  al-Mu'tasim  and  al-Wathik.  It  is  said 
that  he  is  the  one  who  led  al-Ma'mun  astray  by  making  him 
a  Mu'tazilite.  Two  heresies  distinguished  him  from  the 
rest  of  the  predecessors  of  the  Mu'tazilah,  and  it  was  for 
these  that  the  whole  community  condemned  him.  One  of 
these  heresies  was  that  when  he  shared  the  opinions  of  the 
"  companions  of  wisdom  "  in  their  assertion  that  knowledge 
is  necessary,  he  claimed  that  he  whom  Allah  does  not  compel 
to  know  him  (Allah),  is  not  compelled  to  know,  nor  is  he 
prohibited  from  unbelief,  but  is  created  for  unpaid  work 
and  slave  labor,  and  is  therefore  to  be  classed  with  animals 
who  are  not  responsible.     As  a  result  of  this,  he  claimed 

3  Mas'udi,  ibid.     General  index. 
2  Not  in  Shahrastani. 

177 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

that  the  community  of  al-Dahriyah  and  the  Christians,  and 
the  Zindiks,  become  dust  in  the  end.  He  also  claimed  that 
the  next  world  is  only  the  abode  of  reward  or  punishment, 
so  for  the  one  who  died  as  a  child,  or  who  knows  Allah  by 
necessity,  there  is  no  virtue  for  which  they  deserve  a  re- 
waid,  nor  sin  for  which  they  deserve  punishment.  Thus 
they  become  dust,  since  they  have  no  share  in  reward  or 
punishment. 

Thamamah's  second  heresy  is  his  view  that  generated 
acts  are  acts  without  an  author.  This  error  leads  to  the  de- 
nial of  the  creator  of  the  world,  because  if  it  is  true  that 
one  deed  can  exist  without  a  doer,  it  is  possible  for  every 
deed  to  exist  without  a  doer,  and  then  one  could  not  prove 
the  existence  of  the  doer  from  the  deeds,  nor  would  the 
creation  of  the  world  be  a  proof  of  its  creator.  This  would 
be  similar  to  the  assertion  that  there  could  be  writing  with- 
jcg  out  a  writer,  or  erasing  without  one  who  erases,  or  a  build- 
ing without  a  builder.  It  might  be  said  to  him :  "According 
to  you  then,  the  word  of  man  is  a  deed  without  a  doer. 
Why  do  you  then  blame  man  for  his  lies  and  his  words  of 
unbelief,  since,  according  to  you,  he  is  not  the  author  of  his 
act  of  lying,  or  his  words  of  unbelief  ?" 

Among  his  shameful  heresies  Thamamah  used  also  to 
say  that  the  abode  of  Islam  was  the  abode  of  polytheism. 
Moreover,  he  forbade  captivity  because  the  captive,  accord- 
ing to  him,  could  not  have  disobeyed  his  Lord,  not  having 
known  him.  According  to  him,  also,  rebellion  is  possible 
only  for  him  who  knows  his  Lord  by  necessity  and  then 
denies  him,  or  rebels  against  him.  From  this  assertion,  it 
follows  that  he  confesses  himself  a  son  of  adultery  because 
he  belonged  to  the  freedmen,  while  his  mother  was  a  cap- 
tive, and  to  enter  in  to  one  who  could  not  be  a  captive,  ac- 
cording to  the  law  governing  capture,  is  adultery.  His 
children  are  therefore  children  of  adultery.  Thamamah's 
heresy  about  this  matter  suited  his  pedigree. 

178 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

The  historians  report  wonderful  things  regarding  the 
imbecility  of  Thamamah  and  his  shamelessness.  Among 
these  is  what  'Abdallah  ibn-Muslim  ibn-Kutaibah  said  in  his 
book  Mukhtalaf  al-Hadith.  He  said  in  this  that  Thamamah 
ibn-Ashras  saw  men  on  a  Friday  hastening  to  the  mosque 
for  fear  the  hour  of  prayer  would  pass.  Whereupon  he 
said  to  a  companion  of  his,  "  Look  at  these  donkeys  and 
cows."  Then  he  said,  "  What  has  that  Arab  made  out  of 
men?",  meaning  the  Prophet  of  Allah. 

Al-Jahiz  said  in  his  book  of  jests  that  al-Ma'mun  was 
riding  one  day  when  he  saw  Thamamah  drunk,  and  rolling 
in  the  mud,  and  he  said,  "  Thamamah?"  Thamamah  re- 
plied, "  Yes,  by  Allah."  "Aren't  you  ashamed?"  "  No,  by 
Allah."  "  Upon  thee  be  the  curse  of  Allah."  kk  Let  it 
come."  Al-Jahiz  also  said  that  a  servant  of  Thamamah 
said  to  him  one  day,  "Arise  and  pray,"  but  he  paid  no  atten- 
tion. And  the  servant  said  to  him,  "  The  time  is  short, 
arise  and  pray  and  rest,"  and  Thamamah  replied,  k*  T  will 
rest  if  you  will  leave  me." 

The  author  of  Ta'rikh  al-Mardtwimh  says  that  Thama- 
mah ibn-Ashras  accused  Ahmad  ibn-Nasr  al-Marwazi  to  al- 
Wathik,1  saying  that  the  former  condemned  everyone  who 
denies  that  Allah  can  be  seen,  and  everyone  who  claims 
that  the  Koran  was  created,  and  is  free  from  the  heresy  of 
al-Kadariyah.  Wathik  thereupon  put  him  to  death,  but 
promptly  repented  of  his  death,  and  blamed  Thamamah, 
ibn-abi-Da'ud  2  and  ibn-al-Zaiyat 3  who  advised  his  death. 
Ibn-al-Zaiyat  said  to  him :  "If  his  death  does  not  have 
good  results,  may  Allah  slay  me  between  fire  and  water." 
Ibn-abi-Da'ud  said :  "  May  Allah  imprison  me  in  my  skin  if 
his  death  was  not  the  right  thing."    Thamamah  said  :  "  May 

1  Tabarl  ed.  Zotenberg,  vol.  iv,  p.  546. 

2  Ibn-Khallikan,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  61. 

3  Fihrist,  p.  122. 

179 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

Allah  cause  swords  to  rule  over  me,  if  you  were  not  right 
in  killing  him."  Allah  answered  the  prayers  of  each  one 
in  his  own  way.  As  to  ibn-al-Zaiyat,  verily  he  was  killed 
in  the  hath,  and  fell  into  the  fire  with  his  clothes  on,  and 
thus  died  between  fire  and  water.  As  to  ibn-abi-Da  ud,  al- 
Mutawakkil  imprisoned  him,  and  he  had  a  stroke  of  paral- 
ysis while  in  prison,  thus  remaining  imprisoned  in  his  skin 
by  paralysis  until  he  died.  And  as  for  Thamamah,  he  went 
to  Mecca  where  the  Khuza'ah  saw  him  between  al-Safa 
and  al-Marwah,  and  one  of  the  men  called  out  and  said: 
"  O  ye  men  of  Khuza'ah,  this  is  the  man  who  conspired 
against  your  master,  Ahmad  ibn-Fihr,  and  it  was  he  who 
caused  his  death."  Whereupon  the  banu-Khuza'ah  gath- 
ered against  him  with  their  swords  and  killed  him.  Then 
they  brought  his  body  out  from  the  sacred  enclosure,  and 
the  wild  animals  outside  devoured  it.  Thus  Allah's  words 
160  were  fulfilled:  "And  they  tasted  the  harmfulness  of  their 
own  conduct:  and  the  end  of  their  conduct  was  ruin" 
(Surah  65,  v.  9). 

12.  Concerning  the  Jahizlyah  among  them.  These  are  the 
followers  of  'Amr  ibn-Bahr  al-Jahiz.]  They  are  the  people 
who  were  led  away  by  the  beauty  of  the  language  used  by 
al-Jahiz  in  his  books,  about  which  we  might  say:  "They  are 
compositions  which  are  clear,  though  they  have  no  meaning, 
and  contain  words  which  terrify,  though  they  have  no  sub- 
stance." Had  they  known  the  ignorance  shown  in  his  here- 
sies, far  from  ascribing  beauties  to  him,  they  would  have 
begged  Allah's  pardon  for  calling  him  a  man.  Among  the 
errors  ascribed  to  him,  which  al-Ka'bi,  in  spite  of  his  pride 
in  him,  relates  about  him  in  his  treatises,  are  the  words: 
"  All   knowledge   comes   by   nature,   nevertheless   it   is   an 

1  Shahrastani,  ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  77-     Mas'udi,  ibid.,  vol.  iii,  pp.  22-25; 
vol.  v,  p.  80;  vol.  viii,  pp.  33-36.     Ibn-Khallikan,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  4°5- 

180 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

activity  of  man  in  which  he  has  no  choice."    They  add  that 
al-Jahiz  agreed  with  Thamamah  that  man  has  no  other 
activity  except  the  will,  and  that  the  rest  of  his  acts  are 
ascribed  to  man  only  in  the  sense  that  they  occur  by  nature, 
and  naturally  arise  from  his  will."     He  says  that  he  also 
claimed  that  it  is  not  possible  to  become  an  adult  without 
knowing  Allah.     According  to  him,  infidels  are  stubborn, 
though  knowing,  taken  up  with  a  love  for  their  particular 
school,  thankless  for  the  knowledge  he  (Muhammad)  has 
of  his  creator,  and  the  truth  preached  by  his  messengers. 
If   al-Jahiz  agrees   with  al-Ka'bi  that   man  does   nothing 
without  free-will,  he  is  then  obliged  to  maintain  that  man 
does  not  pray,  nor  fast,  nor  go  on  a  pilgrimage,  nor  com- 
mit adultery,  nor  steal,  nor  calumniate,  nor  kill.     Because, 
according  to  him,  it  is  not  he  that  performs  prayer,  nor 
fasts,  nor  makes  a  pilgrimage,  nor  commits  adultery,  nor 
steals,  nor  kills,  nor  calumniates,     For  these  acts,  according 
to  him,  are  not  done  with  his  will.    And  if  these  acts  which 
we  have  mentioned  are,  according  to  him,  natural  and  not 
acquired,  it  must  necessarily  follow  that  man  should  in  no 
sense  have  reward  or  punishment  for  them,  because  man   161 
cannot  be  rewarded  or  punished  for  what  he  has  not  ac- 
quired himself ;  just  as  he  is  not  rewarded  or  punished  for 
his  color,  or  the  mechanism  of  his  members,  since  these  are 
not  of  his  own  attaining. 

Among  the  heresies  of  al-Jahiz  is  also  his  view  of  the 
impossibility  of  the  annihilation  of  the  bodies  after  their 
creation.  This  results  in  the  view  that  Allah  is  able  to 
create  a  thing,  but  is  unable  to  annihilate  it;  and  that  he 
cannot  remain  alone  after  he  has  created  a  creation,  in  the 
same  way  that  he  was  alone  before  he  created  it.  But  we, 
even  if  we  say  that  Allah  does  not  annihilate  paradise  and 
its  pleasures,  and  hell  and  its  torments,  do  not  mean  it 
in  the  sense  that  Allah  has  not  the  power  to  annihilate  all 

181 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

this.    We  mean  only  that  paradise  and  hell  are  everlasting 
in  a  general  way. 

Among  the  heresies  of  al-Jahiz  there  is  also  his  view  that 
Allah  does  not  cause  anyone  to  enter  hell,  but  that  hell 
attracts  its  people  of  itself  by  its  very  nature,  and  then  holds 
on  to  them  of  itself  forever.  This  would  also  compel  the 
view  that  paradise  attracts  people  to  itself  by  its  nature,  and 
that  Allah  does  not  cause  anyone  to  enter  paradise.  If  one 
were  to  hold  this  view,  the  desire  for  Allah's  rewards  would 
cease,  and  the  use  of  prayer  would  be  gone.  On  the  other 
hand,  if  he  said  that  Allah  caused  those  who  should  go  to 
paradise  to  enter  paradise,  he  would  also  have  to  say  that  he 
caused  the  people  of  hell  to  enter  hell.  Al-Ka'bi  boasts 
about  al-Jahiz,  claiming  that  he  was  one  of  the  sheikhs  of 
the  Mu'tazilah.  He  also  boasts  of  his  many  literary  works, 
and  claims  that  he  was  a  Kinani  of  the  banu-Kinanah,  ibn- 
162  Khuzaimah  ibn-Mudrakah  ibn-Ilyas  ibn-Mudhar.  It  might 
be  said  to  al-Ka'bi:  "  If  he  [al-Jahiz]  was  a  Kinani  as  you 
claim,  why  did  he  write  the  book,  The  boasting  of  the  Kah- 
t  amy  ah  over  the  Kinanlyah  and  the  rest  of  the  '  Adnanlyah? 
Moreover,  if  he  was  an  Arab,  then  why  did  he  write  the 
book,  The  Superiority  of  the  Freedmen  over  the  Arabs f 
Moreover,  he  mentioned  in  his  book  called,  Concerning  the 
Boasting  of  Kahtan  over  'Adrian,  a  number  of  poems  in 
which  Kahtan  satirizes  'Adnan.  And  in  truth  the  man  who 
delights  in  the  satires  against  his  fathers  is  like  the  man 
who  himself  satirizes  his  father.  In  satirizing  ibn-Bassam  x 
who  satirized  his  own  father,  Jahzah  2  has  rightly  said : 
"  Whoever  satirizes  his  father — the  mere  fact  of  his  satir- 
izing is  sufficient  (to  show  that  he  is  not  his  son),  for  had 
he  been  his  son  he  would  not  have  satirized  his  father."  1 
He  composed  many  fantastic  books.     One  of  them  tells  of 

1  Ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  301.    The  text  seems  uncertain. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  118. 

182 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

the  tricks  of  robbers;  in  this  manner  he  taught  evil  people 
the  methods  of  stealing.     And  among  his  books  are  those 
on  the  tithes  of  industry  in  which  he  depreciated  the  com- 
modities of  merchants.     Among  them  also  in  his  book  on 
laws,   which   shows  how   dishonest  men  get   hold   of   the 
treasures  and  money  of  the  people.     There  is  also  his  book 
about   the   Fatwa    (religious   decision),    which   is    full   of 
attacks  by  his  preceptor,  al-Nazzam,  on  the  teachings  of 
the    Companions;    also    his    books    about    prostitutes    and 
rabies,  and  sodomy,  and  about  the  tricks  of  the  avaricious. 
The  contents  of  these  books  suit  him,  his  trade  and  his 
family.     He  also  has  a  book  about  the  habits  of  animals, 
the  contents  of  which  he  drew  from  Aristotle's  book  on 
animals,   and   to   it   he   added   what   is   mentioned   by  al- 
Mada'im  *  regarding  the  knowledge  of  the  Arabs,  and  their 
poems  about  the  uses  to  which  animals  could  be  put.     He 
rilled  the  book  with  dialogues  between  dogs  and  roosters. 
To  be  engaged  in  such  dialogues  wastes  time  on  that  which 
is  loathsome.     And  to  whomever  boasts  about  al-Jahiz,  we 
commend  the  saying  of   the   orthodox  about  him  in  the   l63 
words  of  the  poet  concerning  him  : 

"  If  the  ugliness  of  the  swine  is  doubled 
His  ugliness  would  still  be  inferior  to  that  of  al-Jahiz, 
A  man  who  is  himself  a  substitute  for  hell, 
And  a  mote  in  the  eye  of  everyone  who  looks  at  him." 

13.  Concerning  the  Shahhamlyah  among  them.  These 
are  the  followers  of  abu-Ya'kub  al-Shahham,2  who  was  the 
preceptor  of  al-Jubba  1.  His  heresies  resemble  the  heresies 
of  al-Jubba'i,  except  that  he  considers  it  possible  that  there 
is  one  thing  determined  by  two  determiners.  Al-Jubba  1 
and  his  son  denied  this.  Some  of  the  weak-minded  imag- 
ined that  the  teaching  of  al-Shahham  was  similar  to  that  of 


1  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  578. 

2  Horten,  ibid.,  p.  338. 


183 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

the  Sifatiyah  on  this  point.  But  there  is  a  wide  difference 
between  the  two  views.  Al-Shahham  allowed  the  possibility 
of  there  being  one  thing  determined  by  two  determiners — 
each  one  of  which  two  could  produce  the  thing  determined 
interchangeably.  Al-Ka'bi  reports  this  in  his  book  entitled 
fUyun  al-Masail'  ala  abi-al-Hudhail.  But  the  Sifatiyah  do 
not  grant  the  possibility  of  two  creators.  When  they  do 
grant  that  there  are  two  determiners  for  one  thing  deter- 
mined, they  do  so  in  the  sense  that  one  of  the  two  is  its 
creator  and  the  other  the  acquirer,  and  the  creator  is  not  the 
acquirer,  nor  the  acquirer  the  creator.  This  gives  the  ex- 
planation of  the  difference  between  the  two  parties  in  the 
difference  of  their  two  methods  of  exposition. 

14.  Concerning  the  Khaiyatlyah  among  them.  These  are 
the  followers  of  abu-al-Husain  al-Khaiyat,  who  was  the 
preceptor  of  al-Ka'bi  in  his  heresy.  Al-Khaiyat  agreed 
with  the  rest  of  the  Kadanvah  in  most  of  their  heresies, 
except  that  he  differed  from  them  in  saying  on  the  non- 
existent what  none  had  said  before.  For  the  Mu'tazilah 
disagreed  about  calling  the  non-existent  an  object.  Some 
164  of  them  say  it  is  not  true  that  the  non-existent  can  be  known, 
or  described,  nor  that  it  is  an  object,  nor  a  substance, 
nor  an  essence,  nor  a  phenomenon.  This  was  the  opinion 
of  al-Salihi  among  them.1  He  agreed  with  the  orthodox  in 
not  calling  the  non-existent  an  object.  But  others  of  the 
Mu'tazilah  claimed  that  the  non-existent  is  an  object  which 
can  be  known  and  described,  but  is  not  essence  or  phenom- 
enon. This  was  al-Ka'bf  s  opinion.  Al-Jubba?i  and  his  son 
abu-Hashim  claimed  that  ever}-  attribute  was  rendered  real, 
either  for  itself  or  for  its  genus,  by  the  one  that  originated 
it,  and  that  such  attribute  remained,  existing  even  when 
(the  object)  is  non-existent.     He  claimed  further  that  an 

1Ibid.,  p.  305. 

184 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

essence  was  an  essence  even  when  in  a  state  of  non-exist- 
ence, that  a  phenomenon  was  a  phenomenon  even  when  in 
a  state  of  non-existence,  and  that  black  was  black,  and  white 
was  white  even  when  non-existent.    All  of  these  men,  how- 
ever,  forbade  calling  the  non-existent  a  body;  the  body, 
according  to  them,  has  become  complex,  and  comes  to  be  an 
agglomerate,  having  length  and  breadth  and  depth;  it  is 
impossible  to-  describe  something  non-existent  by  something 
to  which  a  bodily  reality  is  attributed.     From  all  the  Mu'ta- 
zilah,  as  well  as  from  the  rest  of  the  sects  of  the  faithful, 
al-Khaiyat  differs  on  this  subject.     He  claims  that  the  body 
when  non-existent  is  a  body  because  it  must  be  a  body  when 
it  appears,  but  that  it  is  not  necessary  for  the  non-existent 
to  be  in  motion,  because,  according  to  him,  a  body  when  it 
appears  is  not  necessarily  in  motion.     He  said :  "  Every 
attribute  [or  qualification]  may  become  existent  when  [the 
thing  described]  makes  its  appearance  "  ;  therefore  he  holds 
it  to  be  existent  even  in  its  state  of  non-existence.     Such 
reasoning  demands  that  man  be  man  before  he  appears  as 
such.     This  were  possible  if  Allah  could  have  brought  him 
into  existence  in  the  form  of  man  in  all  his  completeness 
without  having  formed  him  in  the  loins  and  in  the  womb, 
and  without  at  all  changing  him  from  one  form  to  another.    165 
The  most  advanced  of  these  Khaiyatiyah  are  called  al- 
Ma'dumiyah  because  of  their  extreme  views  on  ascribing 
to  the  non-existent  most  of  the  attributes  of  all  existing 
things.    This  appellation  stuck  to  them.    In  a  separate  book, 
al-Jubba'i  broke  with  al-Khaiyat  over  his  view  that  the  body 
was  a  body  before  its  appearance.     He  makes  the  point 
that  this  view  leads  to  the  view  of  the  pre-existence  of 
bodies  (as  opposed  to  their  being  created).     But  the  fol- 
lowing conclusion  is  necessary  on  the  part  of  al-Khaiyat, 
al-Jubba'i  and  his  son — namely,  that  essences  and  phenom- 
ena are  essences  and  phenomena  even  in  a  state  of  non- 
185 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

existence.  If  they  now  say  that  they  are  still  objects, 
essences,  and  phenomena,  whose  appearance  is  dependent 
upon  their  being  objects,  they  are  still  forced  to  regard  them 
as  eternal,  and  in  reality  hold  the  same  view  as  do  those  who 
believe  that  essences  and  phenomena  are  pre-existent.  Be- 
sides his  heresy  about  Kadar  and  non-existence,  al-Khaiyat 
denied  the  value  of  traditions  coming  from  a  single  author- 
ity. In  doing  this  he  practically  denied  most  of  the  Shari'ah 
laws,  because  most  of  the  legal  ordinances  are  based  upon 
traditions  going  back  to  a  single  authority.  Al-Ka'bi  wrote 
a  book  against  him  on  the  evidence  coming  from  tradition 
going  back  to  a  single  person.  In  this  book  he  con- 
demns (  ?)  *  those  who  deny  such  evidence.  We  say  to  al- 
Ka'bl :  "  It  is  enough  shame  and  disgrace  for  you  to  have 
been  connected  with  a  preceptor  whose  heresy  you  ac- 
knowledge/' 

15.  Concerning  the  Ka'blyah  among  them.  These  are 
the  followers  of  abu-Kasim  'Abdallah  ibn-Ahmad  ibn-Mah- 
mud  al-Banahi,  known  as  al-Ka'bi.  .  .  .  (The  text  of  the 
following  sentence  is  not  clear. )  He  was  a  gatherer  of  wood 
^  before  he  was  introduced  to  various  studies,  both  special  and 
166  general,  and  he  did  not  acquire  a  deep  knowledge  of  their 
secrets  in  any  one  department.  In  fact,  he  failed  to  grasp 
the  superficial, — how  much  more,  then,  the  kernel.  He  dif- 
fered from  the  Basriyun  among  the  Mu'tazilah  over  many 
points,  for  the  Basriyun  held  that  Allah  sees  his  people  in  the 
body,  and  with  colors;  but  they  denied  that  he  sees  himself, 
just  as  they  deny  that  others  see  him.  Al-Ka'bi.  on  the  other 
hand,  claimed  that  Allah  does  not  see  himself,  nor  anyone 
else,  except  in  the  sense  that  he  knows  himself  and  others. 
He  followed  al-Nazzam  in  his  view  that  Allah  does  not  liter- 

1  The  text  at  this  point  is  clear,  but  the  meaning  is  obviously  con- 
tradictory. 

186 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

ally  see  anything.  Another  thing  over  which  he  differed 
from  the  Basriyun  and  our  followers  is  that  they  held  that 
Allah  literally  hears  word  and  sound,  and  not  simply  in  the 
sense  that  he  knows  them.  Al-Ka'bi  and  the  Baghdadiyun 
among  the  Mu'tazilah  claimed  that  Allah  hears  nothing  in 
the  sense  of  perception  known  as  sound.  Moreover,  they  de- 
fined Allah's  attribute  as  the  hearer  and  the  seer,  in  the  sense 
that  he  had  knowledge  of  the  hearable  which  others  heard 
and  the  seeable  which  others  saw.  Furthermore,  some  of 
them  claim  that  the  Basriyun  among  them,  together  with 
our  followers,  hold  that  Allah  exercises  will  in  the  true  sense 
of  the  word.  But  our  followers  say  that  he  does  not  cease 
willing  through  an  eternal  will,  while  the  Basriyun,  among 
the  Mu'tazilah,  claim  that  he  wills  through  his  temporal 
will,  unlimited  by  space.  Al-Ka'bi  and  al-Nazzam,  however, 
and  their  followers  do  not  agree  with  these  two  views,  for 
they  claim  that  Allah  has  no  actual  will,  and  that  when  one 
says  that  Allah  wills  a  thing  which  he  performs,  one  means 
that  he  did  this  thing,  and  when  one  says  that  he  of  himself 
willed  a  deed,  one  means  that  he  commanded  it.  According 
to  both  of  these  explanations,  ascribing  will  to  him  is  merely 
figurative,  just  as  in  the  words  of  Allah :  "  The  wall  wills  167 
to  fall  "  (Surah  18,  v.  76),  the  ascribing  of  will  to  a  wall  is 
merely  figurative.  For  this  denial  of  the  will  of  Allah  they 
together  with  our  followers  were  condemned  as  heretics  by 
the  Basriyun.  Another  thing  over  which  they  disagreed  was 
that  al-Ka'bi  claimed  that  he  who  is  killed  is  not  dead.  But 
this  does  not  agree  with  the  word  of  Allah :  "  Every  spirit 
must  taste  of  death  "  (Surah  3,  v.  186).  The  rest  of  the 
people  agreed  that  all  killed  are  dead,  although  they  admit 
that  a  dead  person  is  not  necessarily  killed.  Another  point 
of  disagreement  is  that  al-Ka'bi  held  the  same  views  as 
those  who  make  it  compulsory  on  Allah  to  do  the  best  thing, 
as  a  matter  of  necessity.     Still  other  points  of  disagree- 

187 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

ment  were  that  both  the  Basriyun  and  our  followers  held 
that  ability  does  not  necessarily  mean  soundness  of  body 
and  safety  from  disease.  Al-Ka'bi  claims  that  it  does. 
As  for  the  Basriyun  among  the  Mu'tazilah,  they  condemn 
the  Baghdadiyun  among  them,  while  the  latter  in  their 
turn  condemn  the  former.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  each  party 
is  justified  in  condemning  the  other,  as  we  explained  in  the 
book  entitled,  Heresies  of  the  KadariyaJi. 

1 6.  Concerning  the  Jubbalyah  among  them.  These  are 
the  followers  of  abu-'AH  al-Jubba'I1  who  led  astray  the 
people  of  Khuzistan.  The  Mu'tazilah  of  Basrah  at  that 
time  belonged  to  his  school,  but  afterwards  joined  the  school 
of  his  son  abu-Hashim.  Among  the  heresies  of  al-Jubba'i 
was  the  one  in  which  he  said  that  Allah  is  obedient  to  his 
servant  if  he  does  what  his  servant  wills.  The  reason  for 
this  was  that  one  day  he  said  to  our  sheikh  abii-1-Hasan  al- 
Ash'ari,  "According  to  you,  what  does  obedience  mean?" 
168  The  sheikh  answered,  "Agreement  to  a  command,"  and  then 
asked  for  his  opinion  in  this  matter.  Al-Jubba'I  said  :  "The 
essence  of  obedience,  according  to  me,  is  agreement  to  the 
will.  And  whoever  fulfils  the  will  of  another  obeys  him  " 
[/.  e.  the  other].  Our  sheikh  abu-1-Hasan  answered:  "Ac- 
cording to  this,  one  must  conclude  that  Allah  is  obedient  to 
his  servant  if  he  [Allah]  fulfils  his  will  "  [i.  e.  the  servant's 
will].  He  granted  this.  Then  our  sheikh  said:  "You 
differ  from  the  community  of  Moslems  and  you  blaspheme 
the  Lord  of  the  Worlds.  For  if  Allah  is  obedient  to  his 
servant,  then  he  must  be  subject  to  him.  Allah  is  far  and 
away  above  being  this.  Al-Jubba'i  furthermore  claimed 
that  the  names  of  Allah  are  subject  to  the  regular  rules  of 
grammar;  he  therefore  considered  it  possible  to  derive  a 
name  for  him  [Allah]  from  every  deed  which  he  performs. 

1  Horten,  ibid.,  p.  352. 

188 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

Our  sheikh  abu-1-Hasan  said,  that  according  to  this  view 
Allah  should  be  named  "  the  producer  of  pregnancy  among 
women,"  because  he  creates  the  pregnancy  in  them.     Al- 
Jubba  I  could  not  escape  this  conclusion.     Our  sheikh  said : 
"  This  heresy  of  yours  is  worse  than  the  heresy  of  the 
Christians  in  calling  Allah  the  father  of  Jesus,  although 
even  they  do  not  hold  that  he  produced  pregnancy  in  Mary." 
Among  the  heresies  of  al-Jubba  I  was  also  the  one,  accord- 
ing to  which  he  considered  it  possible  for  one  phenomenon 
to  be  in  many  places  even  in  more  than  a  thousand  thousand 
places.     Thus  he  considered  it  possible  for  one  word  to  be 
in  a  thousand  thousand  places,  and  he  claimed  that  when  a 
word  written  in  one  place  is  then  written  in  another,  it  ex- 
ists in  two  places,  without  passing  from  the  first  place  to 
the  second,  and  without  making  its  appearance  in  the  second. 
It  is  thus  the  same  whether  it  is  written  in  a  thousand 
places,  or  in  a  thousand  thousand  places.     He  and  his  son 
abu-al-Hashim  claimed  that  Allah,  when  he  desires  to  de- 
stroy the  world,  creates  a  spaceless  phenomenon  by  means 
of  which  he  destroys  all  bodies  and  essences.     But  it  is  not 
within  the  power  of  Allah  to  destroy  some  essences  and 
to  spare  others.     Though  he  created  them  separately,  he   l&9 
is   not   able   to  destroy  them   separately.      It   is    reported 
that  our  sheikh  said  to  al-Jubba  1 :  "  If  you  say  that  Allah 
wishes  all  that  he  decrees,  then  what  do  you  say  of  a  man 
to  whom  a  debt  is  owed,  and  the  payment  is  constantly 
being  put  off,  and  the  debtor  says,  '  Verily  I  will  pay  you 
the  debt  tomorrow,  if  Allah  wishes,'  and  then  does  not  pay 
his  debt  the  next  day?"    He  answered  that  such  a  man  vio- 
lated his  oath,  because  Allah  desires  him  to  pay  the  debt 
then.    Our  sheikh  said  to  him :  "  You  differ  from  the  com- 
munity of  the  Moslems  who  preceded  you,  for  they  agreed 
before  you  that  he  who  binds  his  oath  to  the  will  of  Allah 
does  not  violate  it  if  he  does  not  keep  his  oath." 

189 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

17.  Concerning  the  Bahshannyah.  These  are  the  follow- 
ers of  abu-Hashim  and  of  al-Jubba'I,  and  most  of  the  Mu'- 
tazilah  of  our  age  hold  the  same  view  regarding  the  claims 
he  made  on  ibn-'Abbad,  the  vizier  of  the  Buwaihids.  They 
were  called  al-Dhimmiyah  because  of  their  view  concerning 
the  deserving  of  blame,  even  though  the  deed  is  not  per- 
formed. They  shared  in  most  of  the  heresies  of  the  Mu(- 
tazilah,  though  they  also  distinguished  themselves  from  them 
in  special  heresies  which  they  were  the  first  to  hold.  Among 
others,  was  their  view  about  the  deserving  of  blame  and 
punishment  when  a  deed  had  not  been  performed.  Thus 
verily  they  claimed  that  the  one  who  is  able  to  do  a  thing 
[desiring  to  do  it],  may  not  do  it,  and  yet  commit  infidel- 
ity, in  spite  of  the  fact  that  there  is  no  hindrance  to  the 
deed.  This  assertion  of  theirs  is  due  to  the  fact  that  our 
followers  said  to  the  Mu'tazilah,  if  you  declare  it  possible 
that  ability  precede  the  deed,  it  necessarily  follows  that 
two  times  and  the  many  times  are  equal,  because  the  one 
precedes  the  other.  They  came  to  differ  over  the  answer  to 
the  conclusion,  some  saying  that  the  occurrence  of  the  deed 
170  or  its  non-occurrence  is  possible,  while  ability  is  passing 
from  the  state  of  possibility  to  that  of  actuality.  He  had  to 
conclude  that  the  occurrence  of  the  deed  or  its  non-occur- 
rence is  possible  when  no  hindrance  exists.  In  addition  to 
this,  it  was  claimed  that  ability  does  not  mean  ability  to 
perform  the  deed  at  the  moment  of  occurrence ;  one  of  them 
granted  that  ability  might  be  non-existent  just  as  the  occur- 
rence of  the  deed  was  non-existent  at  the  very  time  when 
inability  occurred,  which  is  the  very  opposite  of  ability 
which  has  vanished  after  having  existed.  Abu-Hashim 
ibn-al-Jubba'I  saw  the  necessity  of  accepting  the  conclusion 
forced  on  him  by  our  companions,  to  wit :  equality  between 
the  two  times  and  the  many,  in  that  he  held  it  possible  that 
ability  should  precede  the  deed.     It  was  impossible  for  the 

190 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

Mu'tazilites  to  come  to  a  real  conclusion  and  he  had  to  find 
some  way  out.     He  considered  it  possible  for  the  man  with 
ability  to  last  forever  together  with  the  continuance  of  his 
power— the  Koran  verse  fitting  his  case  and  all  hindrances 
being  removed  with  regard  to  it,  in  so  far  as  concerns  the 
doing  of  the  deed  and  its  abandonment.    Concerning  this  it 
was  said  to  him :  "Can  you  see  what  is  the  condition  of  the 
man  who  possesses  ability  and  has  moral  responsibility,  but 
dies  before  he  has  performed  an  act  of  obedience  or  disobe- 
dience by  his  ability?"    He  answered :  "  He  deserves  blame 
and  the  punishment  of  eternity,  not  because  of  his  deeds, 
but  because  he  has  not  done  that  which  he  was  commanded 
to  do,  although  he  had  the  ability  and  had  no  hindrances." 
It  was  said  to  him :  "  How  does  he  deserve  punishment  for 
not  doing  what  he  was  commanded,  and  not  doing  what  he 
was  forbidden  to  do,  and  not  deserving  a  reward  because  he 
did  not  do  what  he  was  forbidden  to  do,  even  if  he  does  not 
do  what  he  was  commanded  ?" 

There  were  some  of  his  predecessors  among  the  Mu'ta- 
zilah  who  used  to  condemn  him  who  says  that  Allah  pun- 
ishes the  disobedient  because  of  the  commission  of  a  sin, 
which  the  sinner  did  not  himself  originate.  They,  however, 
now  said :  "  It  is  preferable  to  condemn  abu-Hashim  for 
his  views  on  the  punishment  of  one  who  was  not  disobe- 
dient, either  for  his  own  deed  or  for  that  of  some  one  else." 
Furthermore,  he  should  be  condemned  for  calling  the  per- 
son who  did  not  do  what  he  was  commanded  disobedient, 
even  though  that  person  did  not  commit  a  disobedience, 
thus  applying  the  name  of  obedient  only  to  him  who 
actually  obeys  the  command.  If  it  is  possible  to  have  a 
disobedient  person  without  having  actual  disobedience,  then 
it  is  possible  to  have  an  obedient  person  without  actual 
obedience,  or  an  unbeliever  without  actual  unbelief.  More- 
over, besides  these  hateful  heresies,  he  claimed  that   if 

IOI 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

this  morally  responsible  man  did  a  wrong  thing,  he  would, 
in  this  case,  deserve  a  double  portion  of  the  punishment. 
One  part  for  the  hateful  thing  which  he  did,  and  the 
other  because  he  did  not  perform  the  beautiful  thing  which 
was  commanded  him.  If  he  does  the  right  thing  and  per- 
forms the  deeds  of  the  prophet,  and  Allah  commands 
him  to  do  a  thing  which  he  does  not  do,  nor  does  he 
do  the  opposite,  then  indeed  he  becomes  immortal.  The 
rest  of  the  Mu'tazilah  condemned  him  for  the  three  follow- 
ing propositions.  First,  his  statement  that  punishment  is 
deserved,  even  when  not  due  to  the  actual  deed.  Secondly, 
his  claim  that  a  double  portion  of  the  punishment  is  de- 
erved,  when  a  wrong  thing  is  committed  (for  doing  what 
is  wrong,  and  for  not  doing  what  is  right).  And  thirdly, 
his  view  that  if  he  does  the  right  thing,  and  is  obedient  just 
as  were  the  prophets,  and  yet  fails  to  do  one  thing  which 
Allah  commanded  him,  but  at  the  same  time  does  not  do  its 
opposite,  in  that  case  he  does  not  deserve  eternal  fire  in  hell. 
About  his  view  of  the  double  portion  of  punishment,  our 
companions  said  that  there  must,  according  to  this,  be  two 
punishments;  for  example,  in  the  case  of  adultery,  one 
punishment  is  for  adultery  which  is  committed,  and  the 
second  because  he  failed  to  do  that  which  was  incumbent 
on  him,  i.  e.%  avoiding  adultery.  The  same  view  holds  re- 
garding blasphemy,  punishment,  and  drinking  of  wine. 
172  They  said  that  it  also  necessarily  follows  that  two  atone- 
ments are  incumbent  upon  him  who  breaks  the  fast  in  the 
month  of  Ramadan,  one  for  a  breaking  of  the  fast,  which 
necessitates  atonement,  and  the  other  because  he  did  not  do 
that  which  was  incumbent  on  him,  i.  e.,  fasting  and  with- 
holding from  food.  When  ibn-al-Jubbai  saw  the  trend 
that  his  conclusion  was  taking  against  him,  because  of  these 
heresies  of  his,  he  committed  something  still  more  hateful 
than  these  heresies,  in  order  to  escape  the  necessity  of  two 

192 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

punishments  and  two  atonements  in  connection  with  one 
deed.    So  he  said  :  "  He  simply  forbade  adultery  and  drink- 
ing and  blasphemy.    But  as  for  the  avoiding  of  these  deeds, 
it  is  not  compulsory  for  man."    Furthermore,  they  said  that 
he  must  conclude  that  there  are  three  punishments  and  more 
ad  infinitum,  because  he  asserted  that  there  are  two  punish- 
ments for  that  which  is  committed  by  man,  one  because  he 
did  not  commit  the  act,  and  one  because  he  did  not  commit 
its  cause.     According  to  him,  we  may  find  causes  produced 
by  many  preceding  causes.     For  example,  take  the  hitting 
of  the  target  with  an  arrow,  this  is  produced  by  many 
motions    accomplished    by    the    throwing    of    the    arrow. 
Everyone  of  these  motions  is  a  cause  for  that  which  follows 
until  the  actual  hitting  of  the  target  takes  place.     If  there 
were  a  hundred  motions,  the  hundredth  of  them  would  be 
the  cause  of  the  hitting.     One  should  therefore  conclude 
that  if  Allah  commanded  a  man  to  hit,  and  he  does  not  do 
so,  he  deserves  a  hundred  punishments  and  one  more,  the 
latter  because  he  did  not  make  the  hit,  and  the  hundred  be- 
cause he  did  not  make  the  necessary  motions.     One  must 
also  conclude  that  if  a  man  was  commanded  to  speak,  and 
did  not  do  so,  he  deserves  two  punishments,  one  because  he 
did  not  say  the  word,  and  one  because  he  did  not  produce  its 
cause;  but  if  he  performed  something  opposite  to  the  cause 
of  the  word,  he  does  not  deserve  both  punishments,  for  this 
would  take  the  place  of  the  cause  which  he  did  not  produce. 
We  said  to  him :  "  Would  one  deserve  three  punishments, 
one  because  he  does  not  say  the  word,  another  because  he 
does  not  produce  its  cause,  and  a  third  because  of  the  per- 
formance of  the  opposite  of  the  cause  of  the  word?"    Some   173 
of  our  companions  report  of  him  that  he  did  not  assert  that 
there  were  two  punishments  except  in  the  case  of  his  not 
having  produced  the  cause  of  speaking  a  word.    But  he  had 
pointed  out  the  opposite  view  in  his  book  Istihkak  al-Dhim- 

193 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

mah  (The  Demanding  of  Protection).  In  this  he  said  that 
every  thing  that  could  have  a  special  neglect  is  in  the  same 
category  as  the  cause  of  a  spoken  word.  But  those  things 
which  cannot  have  special  neglect  are  in  the  same  category 
as  the  neglecting  of  giving  an  obligatory  gift,  such  as  alms, 
and  atonement,  as  the  payment  of  a  debt  and  the  return  of 
unlawful  possessions.  What  he  meant  was  that  alms  and 
atonement  and  the  like  are  not  performed  by  a  special  organ 
and  that  there  is  not  a  special  organ  of  neglect  in  connection 
with  each  one.  For  if  a  man  prays  or  goes  on  the  pilgrimage, 
or  does  other  things  of  the  kind,  it  will  occasion  a  neglect 
of  alms.  As  to  speaking  a  word,  the  cause  for  its  neglect 
must  be  special,  and  therefore  to  neglect  it  is  hateful.  There- 
fore, if  he  neglect  the  cause  of  speaking  a  word,  he  deserves 
one  portion  of  punishment.  But  in  the  matter  of  giving 
there  is  no  hateful  neglect.  Therefore,  one  who  does  not 
give  does  not  deserve  another  portion  of  punishment  in  ad- 
dition to  the  blame  he  deserves.  And  so  they  said  to  him : 
"  If  the  neglect  of  prayer  and  alms  is  not  hateful,  then  it 
must  be  beautiful."  Such  a  view  is  a  departure  from  religion 
and  all  that  is  connected  iwth  it.  Among  the  inconsistencies 
he  committed  in  this  chapter  is  the  fact  that  he  called  him 
who  did  not  do  what  he  ought  a  wrongdoer,  even  though  he 
were  not  actually  doing  wrong.  He  thus  called  him  unbe- 
liever and  heretic,  but  hesitated  to  call  him  disobedient.  He 
thus  considered  it  possible  for  Allah  to  consign  a  man  to  fire 
forever,  even  though  he  did  not  deserve  the  appellation  of 
disobedient.  But  if  he  called  him  unbeliever  and  heretic,  he 
must  call  him  disobedient;  whereas,  if  he  refrains  from 
calling  him  disobedient  he  should  not  call  him  heretic  and 
unbeliever.  Another  inconsistency  is  his  disagreement  with 
the  consensus  of  opinion  by  making  distinction  between 
j  74  recompense  and  reward,  according  to  which  he  said :  "  It 
follows  that  there  may  be  much  reward  in  heaven  which  is 

194 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

not  recompense,  and  that  in  hell  there  may  be  much  retri- 
bution that  is  not  recompense.  He  refused  to  call  it  recom- 
pense, because  recompense  is  only  for  an  act,  and  accord- 
ing to  him  there  may  be  punishment  without  there  having 
been  any  act.  It  might  well  be  said  of  him :  "  Since  there 
can  be  no  recompense  save  for  an  act,  then  why  do  you 
deny  that  there  is  no  reward  and  retribution  except  for 
an  act?" 

Abu-Hashim's  second  heresy  was  his  view  that  one  could 
deserve  blame  and  praise  for  the  act  of  another.     For  ex- 
ample, if  Zaid  commands  'Amr  to  give  something  to  some- 
one else,  and  he  does  so,  he  deserves  thanks  from  the  re- 
cipient of  the  gift  for  the  act  which  was  really  due  to  the 
act  of  someone  else.     In  the  same  way  if  he  commanded 
him  a  sin,  and  he  committed  it,  he  does  not  himself  deserve 
the  blame  for  the  sin  which  is  due  to  the  act  of  another. 
This  view  of  his  is  not  like  the  view  of  the  rest  of  the  com- 
munity, in  that  he  claims  that  one  deserves  thanks  or  blame 
according  to  the  command  given,  not  according  to  the  act 
commanded  him,  and  which  was  done  for  another.     This 
view  forced  him  to  say  that  there  was  double  praise  and 
double  blame,  one  of  them  for  the  command  which  is  per- 
formed, and  the  other  for  the  thing  commanded,  which  is 
in  reality  the  act  of  another.     How  can  this  view  of  his  be 
true,  when  he  denies  the  truth  of  what  those  say  who  live 
for  gain,  i  e.  to  the  effect  that  Allah  created  the  gains  of  his 
servants,  and  then  either  rewards  or  punishes  them  for  it. 
It  might  be  said  to  him :  "  What  you  deny  on  this  basis, 
which  is  the  act  of  another,  separates  you  from  the  view  of 
the  Azarikah  that  Allah  torments  the  child  of  the  polytheist 
for  the  deed  of  his  fathers."    Furthermore,  it  might  be  said : 
"If  you  conclude  this,  then  you  must  conclude  that  man  iy$ 
deserves  praise  and  reward  for  a  deed  done  by  Allah  in 
conjunction  with  the  deed  of  man,  e.  g.  a  man  who  is  on 

195 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

his  deathbed,  is  given  food  and  drink,  and  as  a  result  lives 
and  breathes  again,  according  to  this  conclusion  he  deserves 
praise  and  reward  for  his  own  life  and  for  the  satisfaction 
of  his  hunger  and  thirst,  which,  after  all,  is  really  an  act  of 
Allah. 

His  third  heresy  is  his  view  that  repentance  is  not  ac- 
cepted as  long  as  the  sinner  adheres  to  some  other  evil  thing 
which  he  knows  is  evil  or  which  he  believes  to  be  evil,  even 
if  it  is  good  in  itself.  He  also  claims  that  repentance  of 
heresy  cannot  be  accepted  if  the  sinner  still  persists  in  with- 
holding the  smallest  item  due  by  him.  In  support  of  his 
assertion  he  gave  the  following  illustration,  that  he  who 
kills  another  man's  son  and  commits  adultery  with  the 
latter's  wife,  his  repentance  for  one  of  the  sins  may  be 
accepted  even  if  he  persists  in  the  other.  But  such  an  ex- 
ample can  not  be  admitted  as  illustration.  The  acceptance 
of  his  repentance  (for  the  one  sin)  is  all  right,  if  he  is 
punished  for  the  other,  just  as  in  the  case  of  the  son  who 
is  ungrateful  to  his  father  the  Imam,  steals  from  various 
persons,  and  commits  adultery  with  his  maids,  then  asks 
forgiveness  of  the  father  for  the  ungratefulness,  and  the 
repentance  of  his  ungratefulness  is  accepted  for  the  money 
he  stole  from  him  (his  father),  but  his  hand  is  cut  off  for 
the  rest  of  the  property  (stolen),  and  he  is  flogged  for  the 
adultery.  For  his  proof  in  this  case  he  asserted  that  the 
only  necessity  for  his  forsaking  what  was  evil  was  the  fact 
of  its  being  evil;  but  if  he  persisted  in  some  other  evil,  it 
would  show  that  the  reason  for  his  forsaking  the  first  was 
not  simply  because  it  was  evil.  We  say  to  him :  "  That 
which  you  deny  is  the  abandoning  of  evil  in  order  to  escape 
retribution."  Is  it  possible  for  a  man  to  escape  retribution 
for  the  sin  of  which  he  repents,  and  at  the  same  time  be 
punished  for  the  sin  of  which  he  does  not  repent  ?  Here  is 
176  what  we  said  further  to  him:  "The  essence  of  what  is  in 

196 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

this  chapter,  is  that  he  who  repents  of  some  of  his  sins,  re- 
nouncing and  repenting  these  sins  because  they  are  vile,  but 
still  persists  in  some  other  vile  sin;  why  is  this  one's  re- 
pentance not  accepted  on  what  he  repented ;  as  in  the  case 
of  the  Khawarij  and  others  who  have  held  corrupt  beliefs 
considered  good  by  them,  and  whose  repentance  you  accept 
with  regard  to  some  evil  they  know  to  be  evil,  even  when  it 
is  connected  with  persistence  in  some  other  evil  which  they 
had  believed  was  good?     According  to  this  you  must  con- 
clude that  if  you  say  that  he  is  commanded  to  avoid  every- 
thing which  he  believes  is  evil,  then  you  say  of  the  man 
among  us  who  believes  in  the  evil  of  the  school  of  abu- 
Hashim,  and  commits  adultery  and  theft,  that  his  repent- 
ance  cannot  be   accepted  except   by  his    forsaking  every- 
thing which  he  believes  is  evil.     He  is  then  commanded  to 
avoid  adultery  and  theft,  and  to  avoid  the  school  of  abu- 
Hashim,  because  of  his  belief  in  their  evil."    Our  followers 
asked  him  about  a  Jew  who  becomes  a  Moslem  and  repents 
of  all  evil  except  that  he  persists  in  keeping  a  small  piece  of 
silver  away  from  the  one  who  justly  deserved  it,  although 
he  knows  such  an  act  is  illegal;  in  such  a  case  is  the  man's 
repentance  of  heresy  to  be  accepted?    If  he  said  yes  to  this, 
he  would  be  breaking  down  his  own  excuse,  and  if  he  said 
no  he  would  be  opposing  the  whole  of  the  community,  both 
because  of  his  view  that  his  Islamism  was  not  true,  and  be- 
cause he  was  heretical  about  his  Judaism  which  he  had  held 
before  his  repentance;  lastly,  because  the  regulations  of  the 
Jews  are  not  binding  on  him.     He  claimed,  therefore,  that 
he  did  not  repent  of  his  Judaism,  but  persisted  in  it,  but  is 
nevertheless  no  Jew.     This  is  very  evidently  contradictory, 
and  it  might  be  said  to  him  that  if  the  man  persisted  in  his 
Judaism,  then  you  should  recognize  his  sacrifice  as  legal 
and  take  tax  from  him.    This  view  differs  from  that  of  the 

community. 

107 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

His  fourth  heresy  is  his  view  that  repentance  from  sin 
tjy  after  inability  to  sin  is  not  acceptable.  Nor,  according  to 
him,  is  repentance  for  lying  acceptable  when  the  tongue 
becomes  unable  to  speak,  nor  repentance  for  adultery  when 
the  man  is  a  eunuch.  This  is  contradictory  to  the  view  of 
all  of  the  community  before  him.  It  might  be  said  to  him : 
"  Do  you  believe  that  a  man  who  has  a  tongue  and  tells  a 
lie,  who  can  and  does  commit  adultery,  is  a  sinner?"  And 
if  he  says  yes,  then  it  can  be  said :  "  In  like  manner,  he 
must  believe  that  if  one  can  lie  and  commit  adultery  and  yet 
does  not  disobey  Allah,  then  obedience  and  repentance  are 
necessarily  present."  With  his  excesses  in  threats,  abu- 
Hashim  was  the  most  dissolute  of  the  men  of  his  time.  He 
was  also  given  to  drinking  wine.  And  it  was  said  that  he 
died  when  drunk,  so  that  some  Murji'ite  said : 

"  He  says  shameful  things  about  the  Murji'ah  until 
He  sees  some  hope  in  the  sins, 

And  the  greatest  sinner  among  the  people  are  the  Murji'ah 
And  my  servant  persisted  in  the  major  sins  (?)" 

His  fifth  heresy  was  his  view  on  the  conditioned  will. 
The  chief  point  in  this  is  his  view  that  it  is  not  possible  for 
one  thing  to  be  desired  from  one  standpoint  and  abominated 
from  another.  What  forced  him  to  this  is  that  he  spoke 
against  him  who  believes  in  different  standpoints  regarding 
acquisition  and  creation ;  he  said  that  the  standpoint  of  ac- 
quisition is  necessarily  either  real  or  unreal.  If  the  stand- 
178  P°^nt:  ^  unreal,  we  should  have  proof  of  the  existence  of  a 
thing  that  is  both  real  and  unreal.  If  it  is  real,  it  is  necessar- 
ily either  created  or  non-created.  If  it  is  created,  it  proves 
that  it  is  created  from  all  standpoints,  while  if  it  is  not  cre- 
ated, the  mind  becomes  eternal  (non-created)  from  one 
standpoint  and  created  from  another,  which  is  an  impossibil- 
ity. He  was  led  to  this  view  by  his  thought  that  a  thing  must 
be  desired  from  one  standpoint  and  abominated  from  an- 

198 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

other.    It  may  be  said  to  him  :  "Then  will,  according  to  you, 
is  not  related  to  a  thing,  except  from  the  standpoint  of  its 
occurrence,  which  is  also  an  abomination.     And  if  a  thing 
is  willed  from  one  standpoint,  and  abominated  from  another, 
it  follows  that  the  one  who  Wills  has  willed  what  he  wills 
and  abominated  what  he  wills,  which  is  a  contradiction." 
But  he  said :  "The  one  willing,  wills  nothing  except  from  all 
standpoints,  so  that  it  is  not  possible  for  him  to  abominate  it 
from  another  standpoint."    This  view  is  necessarily  followed 
by  the  question  of  the  known  and  the  unknown,  since  he 
does  not  deny  that  a  thing  can  be  known  from  one  stand- 
point and  unknown  from  the  other,  by  committing  himself  to 
the  view  that  the  same  thing  cannot  be  willed  from  one 
standpoint  and  abominated  from  another,  he  laid  himself 
open  to  problems  which  destroy  the  basis  of  the  Mu'tazilah 
creed.    In  fact,  he  had  committed  himself  to  most  of  these, 
and  thus  had  to  conclude  that  among  the  greatest  heresies 
there  were  some  that  Allah  did  not  abominate,  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  among  the  beautiful  truths,  there  were  some 
that  Allah  did  not  will.     The  explanation  of  this  is  that  if 
to  kneel  before  Allah  is  worship  ...(?),..•  of  idols, 
although  to  kneel  before  an  idol  is  a  great  evil.     And  thus   179 
if  he  should  wish  that  his  description  of  Muhammad  as  the 
prophet  of  Allah  should  refer  to  ibn-'Abdallah,  it  would  be 
necessary  for  him  not  to  dislike  it  to  be  a  description  of  an- 
other Muhammad,  although  this  is  heresy.    It  also  follows 
that  if  Allah  hates  to  have  kneeling  used  as  a  worship  of 
idols,  then  he  does  not  wish  it  to  be  a  worship  of  Allah,  even 
though   (in  such  a  case)   it  be  the  worship  of  Allah  and 
beautiful   obedience.     To  all   this,  he  committed  himself, 
and   moreover  he  mentioned  in  his  great   Collection  that 
kneeling  to  idols  is  not  abominated  by  Allah;  at  the  same 
time  he  rejected  the   fact  that  the  same  thing  could  be 
willed    and    abominated    from    two    different    standpoints. 

199 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

This  view  he  said  abu-'Ali,  his  father,  considered  to  be 
right.  According  to  me,  this  view  is  not  based  upon  proper 
principles,  for  will  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  thing,,  ex- 
cept in  the  matter  of  occurrence,  according  to  us  and  to 
him.  If  he  wills  the  occurrence  of  a  thing,  and  at  the 
same  time  abominates  it,  it  follows  that  what  he  abom- 
inates is  what  he  wills,  unless  there  were  two  occurrences  of 
the  thing.  According  to  us,  he  who  relies  on  him  is  wrong 
because  we  hold  that  will  has  to  do  with  the  willed  from  the 
standpoint  of  occurrence,  as  well  as  from  other  standpoints. 
This  conclusion  which  is  forced  on  him  is  not  forced  on  his 
father,  and  for  forcing  this  conclusion  there  is  an  amswer 
and  a  reversal.  As  to  the  answer,  his  father  in  his  view 
does  not  mean  that  will  has  to  do  with  the  thing  from  the 
standpoint  of  occurrence,  as  abu-Hashim  held;  in  reality 
the  father  meant  that  the  will  is  related  to  the  thing  while 
it  was  occurring,  or  to  an  attribute  which  it  has  while  oc- 
curring; such  as  willing  an  act  and  willing  that  it  should  be 
an  act  of  obedience  to  Allah,  this  (obedience)  being  an  attri- 
bute that  develops  at  the  time  of  the  occurrence.  This  re- 
sembles the  view  that  command  and  report  are  not  command 
and  report  except  through  the  will,  either  the  will  of  the  one 
commanding,  according  to  abu-Hashim  and  others,  or  its  in- 
i80  herent  will  to  be  a  command  and  a  report,  as  ibn-al-Ikhshid 
among  them  said,  because  Allah  had  said,  "And  let  him  then 
who  will,  believe"  (Surah  18,  v.  28).  He  has,  therefore, 
willed  the  occurrence  of  his  word,  as  well  as  the  belief  from 
them,  but  the  words,  "Let  him  believe,"  is  not,  in  this  case,  a 
command ;  rather  is  it  a  threat,  because  he  did  not  will  this 
word  to  be  a  command.  The  report,  according  to  them,  is 
not  a  report  until  he  wills  it  to  be  a  report  about  this  man 
and  not  that  man.  Although  this  is  the  reason  for  the  will- 
ing of  the  occurrence  of  a  thing,  and  although  it  has  been 
proved  that  Allah's  dislike  of  having  kneeling  made  a  wor- 

200 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

ship  of  idols  is  different  from  his  will  about  its  occurrence, 
yet  what  abu-Hashim  said  about  its  being  willed  from  the 
standpoint  which  he  abominated,  does  not  follow.  And  as 
for  the  reversal,  it  is  said  Allah  forbids  kneeling  to  idols,  and 
has  given  a  command  about  it,  and  it  has  been  firmly  held  by 
the  Mu'tazilah  that  Allah  commanded  only  the  occurrence  of 
the  thing,  and  also  forbids  only  its  occurrence.  Moreover,  as 
they  have  held  that  Allah  commanded  kneeling  as  an  act  of 
worship  to  him,  it  must  therefore  follow  that  he  forbids 
something  from  the  standpoint  which  he  commanded;  for 
he  forbids  only  the  occurrence  of  the  thing,  and  kneeling  is 
only  one  occurrence.  If,  however,  it  had  two  occurrences, 
it  would  be  necessary  for  it  to  be  created  from  one  stand- 
point and  uncreated  from  another,  whereupon  the  same 
conclusion  about  commanding  and  forbidding  is  forced  upon 
him  which  was  forced  upon  his  father  and  the  merchants  ( ?) 
with  regard  to  willing  and  abominating. 

His  sixth  heresy  is  his  view  regarding  "  the  status "  181 
(Ahwal),  which  view  was  considered  heretic  by  his  fellow 
Mu'tazilites,  as  well  as  the  other  sects.  What  forced  him 
to  this  heresy  was  the  question  put  by  our  followers,  the  old 
Mu'tazilites,  as  to  whether  the  learned  among  us  differs 
from  the  ignorant  by  his  knowledge  in  himself  or  for  some 
other  reason.  They  rejected  the  view  that  he  differed  from 
him  in  himself  because  both  are  of  one  kind.  It  is  impos- 
sible that  his  difference  with  himself  should  be  neither  be- 
cause of  himself  nor  for  some  other  reason,  because  then,  in 
differing  from  himself,  he  would  not  be  superior  to  anyone 
else.  It  necessarily  follows,  too,  that  Allah  has  in  his  dif- 
ference from  the  ignorant  a  significance  (ma'na)  or  an 
attribute  by  which  he  is  differentiated.  He  thus  claims  that 
Allah  differs  from  the  ignorant  only  for  being  in  a  special 
state  (Ml).  Therefore  the  state  exists  in  three  situations. 
The  first  is  the  one  in  which  the  subject  (mausilf)  itself 

201 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

receives  the  attribute  and  deserves  the  attribute  because  of 
the  state  in  which  it  is. 

The  second  situation  is  that  the  subject  to  which  an  attri- 
bute is  given  becomes  attached  to  that  attribute  as  its  state 
(Ml), 

The  third  situation  is  that  the  subject  deserves  an  attri- 
bute neither  for  itself  nor  for  an  attribute,  and  becomes 
attached  to  that  quality  rather  than  anything  else  attached 
to  the  subject  as  its  state. 

What  forced  him  into  this  was  a  question  put  by  Mu'am- 
mar  regarding  "  the  significances  "  :  "  Did  the  learning  of 
Zaid  belong  to  him  rather  than  'Amr,  for  himself  or  for 
some  significance,  or  neither  for  himself  nor  some  signifi- 
cance ?"  If  it  is  for  himself,  then  it  follows  that  all  branches 
of  learning  belong  to  him,  for  they  are  all  learning.  If  it  is 
for  some  significance,  then  Mu'ammar  is  right  in  holding 
that  each  significance  is  attached  to  another  significance 
endlessly.  If  it  is  neither  for  himself  nor  for  some  signifi- 
cance, then  the  fact  that  it  belongs  to  him  or  to  some  one 
else  is  immaterial.  According  to  abu-Hashim,  Zaid's  learn- 
ing belongs  to  him  for  some  state  (hal).  But  our  follow- 
ers say  that  his  learning  belongs  to  him  by  its  essence,  and 
neither  because  it  was  knowledge  nor  because  it  was  Zaid ; 
182  which  is  like  saying  that  black  is  black  because  of  its  essence 
and  not  because  it  has  a  self  or  a  being.  They  then  said  to 
abu-Hashim,  "  Do  you  know  the  status  or  not?"  And  he 
said  no,  because  if  he  had  said  that  they  were  known,  he 
would  have  had  to  prove  that  they  were  objects,  because, 
according  to  him,  nothing  is  known  unless  it  is  an  object. 
Nor  could  he  say  that  they  were  changing  status,  because 
changes  occur  only  in  the  case  of  objects  and  substances. 
Moreover,  he  does  not  say  that  status  exist,  nor  does  he  say 
that  they  are  non-existent,  nor  that  they  are  eternal,  nor 
that  they  are  created,  nor  that  they  are  known,  nor  that 

202 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

they  are  unknown,  nor  does  he  say  that  they  are  mentioned, 
although  he  mentioned  them,  holding  that  they  are  unmen- 
tioned,  which  is  a  contradiction. 

He  claimed,  moreover,  that  the  learned  has  in  each  known 
thing  a  condition  which  cannot  be  said  to  be  his  condition 
in  another  known  thing.  To  this  end,  he  claimed  that  the 
conditions  of  the  creator  as  to  what  he  knows  are  endless ; 
the  same  thing  being  true  about  his  conditions  in  his  own 
capabilities,  that  they  are  endless  just  as  his  capabilities  are 
endless.  Our  companions  say  to  him :  "  You  did  not  deny 
that  for  one  known  thing  there  are  endless  conditions,  for 
the  known  can  be  dependent  on  any  existent  knower  ad  in- 
finitum. Furthermore,  are  the  conditions  of  the  creator 
brought  about  by  others,  or  are  they  he  himself?"  To  this 
he  answered,  "  They  are  neither  he  nor  another."  They 
then  said  to  him,  "  Why  do  you  deny  the  view  of  the  Sifat- 
lyah  that  the  attributes  of  Allah  are  endless,  since  they  are 
neither  he  nor  another?"  1 

1  In  the  sixth  of  his  heresies  Abu-Hashim  addresses  himself  to  the 
problem  of  absolute  being,  human  and  divine  and  raises  the  question 
as  to  how  the  essence  of  this  being  differentiates  itself  from  another  being 
of  the  same  genus  or  of  another  class  and  kind.  Does  a  philosopher 
differ  from  a  fool,  the  learned  from  the  ignorant,  by  what  the  philo- 
sopher or  the  learned  know,  or  in  essence  through  some  other  causes. 
These  early  Arab  enquirers,  the  old  Mu'tazilah,  held  that  it  was  not 
in  essence  or  in  some  quality  of  the  essence ;  for  both  belong  to  the  same 
genus.     (For  what  is  the  wise  man  more  than  the  fool?) 

These  twain  differ  not  in  essence  nor  in  the  phenomena,  the  acci- 
dents nor  the  acquirements  of  life— a  Semitic  view  as  old  as  the 
Preacher  of  Ecclesiastes— and  the  difference,  what  ever  source  jt  is 
from  does  not  make  the  one  superior  to  another.  But  Allah.  al-'Alim, 
the  knowing,  in  what  fashion  does  he  differ  from  the  ignorant,  in 
what  sense  and  in  what  attribute  does  he  differ?  Abu-Hashim  asserts 
that  God  differed  solely  in  essence  and  not  otherwise,  and  this  essence 
differs  in  ways,  or  phases  or  particulars. 

The  point  of  these  aspects  is  that  it  is  true  of  the  divine  essence 
that  it  is  as  it  is  and  can  be  no  other,  and  as  it  is  in  and  by  itself 
described  and  denned,  and  its  conditioning  nature  is  its  inevitable  and 
natural  condition  so  that  no  other  is  or  can  be  like  it. 

203 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

His  seventh  heresy  is  the  denial  of  certain  phenomena 
[accidentals],  the  existence  of  which  has  been  established 
183  by  almost  everyone,  such  as  continuance,  perception,  grief, 
pain,  and  doubt.  He  claims  that  pain  which  has  been  in- 
flicted on  man  by  an  accident,  and  pain  which  comes  from 
drinking  distasteful  medicines,  does  not  mean  more  than 
the  perception  of  something  which  temperament  shuns; 
therefore  perception,  according  to  him,  is  not  a  reality.  The 
same  is  true  of  the  perception  of  the  substances  of  people 
condemned  to  fire  while  they  are  in  fire.  In  the  same  way, 
according  to  him,  pleasures  are  not  realities,  they  are  not 
more  than  perceptions  of  a  desired  thing,  and  perception  is 
not  a  reality.  Of  the  pain  which  comes  from  the  plague,  he 
said  it  is  a  reality  like  that  which  comes  from  a  blow.  For 
proof  of  this  he  gave  the  view  that  it  was  included  under 
sensation,  which  is  a  strange  view,  because  the  pain  due  to 
a  blow  with  a  stick,  and  the  pain  from  mustard  medicine, 
and  the  sting  that  comes  from  fire  and  from  the  drinking  of 
bitter  herbs  are  the  same  as  regards  sensation.  Moreover, 
if  he  rejects  the  existence  of  pleasures  as  a  reality,  he  cannot 
then  consider  the  pleasures  of  the  people  of  heaven  more 
than  the  pleasures  of  infants  which  are  given  to  them  for 
well-doing,  for  nothing  cannot  be  more  than  nothing.  But 
he  claimed  that  pleasure  in  itself  is  a  benefit  and  a  sensation, 
and  yet  he  asserted  that  benefit  and  sensation  are  nothing. 
Moreover,  he  claims  that  all  pain  is  harm,  from  which  it 
follows  that  according  to  him  harm  also  is  nothing. 

His  eighth  heresy  is  his  view  in  his  chapter  on  annihila- 
tion, to  the  effect  that  Allah  has  no  power  to  annihilate  an 
atom  from  the  world  and  still  preserve  the  integrity  of 
heaven  and  earth.  This  claim  he  founded  on  the  basis  of 
his  assertion  that  bodies  cannot  be  annihilated  except  by  an 
annihilation  created  by  Allah  in  no  particular  place  and  one 
that  is  opposed  to  all  existing  things  because  it  is  not  pecu- 

204 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

liar  to  some  of  the  substances,  exclusive  of  others,  since  it 
does  not  pertain  to  any  of  them.     If  it  is  opposed  to  them,    184 
it  annihilates  them  all.     Regarding  this  heresy,  it  is  suffi- 
cient to  note  that  he  says  that  Allah  was  able  to  annihilate 
a  whole,  but  was  not  able  to  annihilate  a  part. 

His  ninth  heresy  is  his  view  that  ablution  is  not  a  neces- 
sity.    What  drove  him  to  this  was  that  he  asked  himself 
about  ablutions  with  water  illegally  acquired  (his  view  and 
that  of  his  father  being  that  prayer  is  illegal  if  performed 
on  ground  illegally  acquired).     He  came  to  the  conclusion 
about  ablutions  with  water  illegally  acquired;  (his  view  and 
able.      The   distinction   he   made   between  the   latter  and 
prayer  performed  in  a  house  illegally  acquired,  was  that 
ablutions  are  not  necessary.     Thus,  although  Allah  com- 
mands his  followers  to  pray  only  after  ablutions,  this  man 
inferred  that  ablutions  are  not  a  necessity,  because  one  may 
perform  the  ablutions  for  another,  and  it  will  be  acceptable. 
He  then  carried  this  reasoning  into  the  matter  of  the  pil- 
grimage,  claiming  that  standing  and   going    [around   the 
Ka'bah]  and  running  are  not  necessary  to  the  pilgrimage, 
because  he  can  acquit  himself  of  all  duties  when  riding. 
According  to  this  view,  he  must  hold  the  required  alms 
not  obligatory,  as  well  as  the  atonement,  and  vows,  and 
the  payment  of  debts,  because  these  can  be  done  by  proxy. 
Yet  these  are  the  most  important  regulations  of  the  relig- 
ious law.     It  becomes  evident  by  what  we  have  mentioned 
in   this   chapter  that   the   leaders   of   the   Mu'tazilah   con- 
demned each  other  as  heretics.     Most  of  them  also  con- 
demned their  followers  who  imitated  them.    So  to  them  we 
can  apply  the  following  saying  of  Allah  :  "  We  have  aroused 
enmity  and  hatred  among  them"  (Surah  5,  v.  15).     The 
following  applies  to  the  relation  of  their  followers  to  them : 
"  When  those  who  have  had  followers  shall  declare  them- 
selves free  from  their  followers,  after  that  they  have  seen 

205 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

the  chastisement,  and  when  the  ties  between  them  shall  be 

185  cut  asunder"  (Surah  2,  v.  167).  And  further:  "The  fol- 
lowers shall  say,  '  Could  we  but  return  to  life,  we  would 
keep  ourselves  clear  from  them,  as  they  have  declared 
themselves  clear  of  us  '  "  (Surah  5,  v.  168). 

Among  the  obstinacies  of  their  leaders  is  that  of  al- 
Nazzam  regarding  the  "  leap  "  and  his  view  that  the  body 
passes  from  the  first  place  to  the  third  or  the  tenth,  without 
need  of  a  medium.  We  find  here  also  the  obstinacies  of 
that  class  of  perjurers  who*  assert  that  the  dead  really  kill 
those  who  are  alive.  We  also  find  the  obstinacies  of  many 
of  them  in  which  they  assert  that  he  who  is  able  to  arise 
above  the  earth  one  span  has  also  the  power  to  rise  above 
the  seven  heavens,  and  that  those  who  have  chained  and 
bound  hands  are  able  to  scale  the  steeps  of  the  heavens,  and 
that  a  small  bug  is  able  to  drink  the  whole  bottle  (  ?). 

Another  of  them,  known  as  Kasim  al-Dimashki  claims 
that  letters  of  truth  may  form  an  untruth,  and  that  the  letters 
which  are  in  the  creed,  "  there  is  no  God  but  Allah,"  are 
the  same  as  those  used  in  saying  that  Christ  is  a  God; 
also  that  the  letters  which  are  in  the  Koran  are  the  same 
as  those  in  the  book  of  Zoroaster  of  the  Magians,  being 
actually  the  same  and  not  simply  alike  in  one  sense.  He 
who  does  not  consider  such  views  as  these  mental  arro- 
gance, cannot  consider  the  denial  of  the  tangible  by  the 
Sophists  an  arrogance. 

The  Ashab  al-Makalat  (the  writers  of  sayings)  report 
that  seven  of  the  leaders  of  the  Kadariyah  gathered  to- 
gether in  a  meeting  and  talked  of  Allah's  power  to  op- 
press and  lie.  When  they  separated,  each  one  was  con- 
demning the  other.  One  of  them  said  to  al-Nazzam  in 
this  meeting:   "Has  Allah    [sufficient]    power  over  what 

186  comes  forth  from  him  to  turn  it  into  oppression  and  lying?" 
He  replied :  "  If  he  has  such  power,  we  cannot  tell  whether 

ro6 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAII 

he  has  oppressed  or  has  lied  in  what  has  already  come  to 
pass,  or  whether  he  may  oppress  or  lie  in  the  future,  or  may 
even  have  oppressed  in  some  parts  of  the  earth  [and  not 
others].  The  only  security  we  have  against  his  oppression 
and  his  lying  is  by  our  having  a  good  opinion  of  him."  The 
questioner  went  on :  "  What  evidence  then  makes  us  secure 
from  such  behaviour  on  his  [Allah's]  part;  but  to  find  this 
out  there  is  no  way.  To  this  'All  al-Aswari  answered : 
"According  to  this  reasoning  of  yours  it  necessarily  follows 
that  Allah  has  no  power  over  what  he  knows  he  does  not  do, 
or  over  what  he  said  he  would  not  do,  because  if  he  had 
power  over  it,  he  might  have  brought  it  about  [after  all]  in 
the  past  or  he  may  cause  it  in  the  future."  Al-Nazzam  said  : 
"This  does  necessarily  follow, — what,  then,  is  your  view  of 
it?"  He  replied:  "I  compromise  between  the  two  views, 
and  say  that  Allah  has  no  power  over  what  he  knows  he  will 
not  do,  or  over  what  he  said  he  would  not  do,  just  as  you  and 
I  say  that  he  has  no*  power  to  oppress  and  lie."  Al-Nazzam 
then  said  to  al-Aswari :  "  Your  view  is  apostate  and  heret- 
ical." Abu-al-Hudhail  said  to  al-Aswari :  "What  do  you  say 
of  Pharaoh,  and  of  those  whom  Allah  knew  would  not  be- 
lieve,— were  they  able  to  believe  or  not?  If  you  claim  that 
they  were  not  able  to  believe,  then  Allah  would  have  laid 
upon  them  what  they  were  unable  to  bear,  and  this,  according 
to  you,  is  heretical.  On  the  other  hand,  if  you  say  that  they 
were  able  to  believe,  then  how  do  you  escape  the  fact  that 
things  occurred  through  them,  which  Allah  knew  would  not 
occur,  or  that  he  said  would  not  occur.  According  to  your 
reasoning  and  that  of  al-Nazzam  this  is  a  denial  similar  to 
denying  Allah's  power  to  oppress  and  lie."  He  replied  to 
abu-al-Hudhail :  "  Since  this  necessarily  follows,  how 
would  you  answer  it?"  And  he  replied :  "  My  view  is  that 
Allah  has  power  to  oppress  and  to  lie,  and  to  do  what  he 
knows  he  would  not  do."    And  both  of  them  said  to  him : 

207 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

jg^  "If  he  oppresses  and  lies,  do  you  see  what  is  to  be  made  of 
the  principles  of  the  essence  of  the  evidence  which  tries 
to  prove  that  Allah  does  not  oppress  or  lie?"  He  replied: 
"  This  is  impossible."  Whereupon  they  both  said  to  him: 
"  How  can  the  impossible  be  within  the  power  of  Allah, 
and  why  did  you  consider  it  impossible  for  such  a  thing  to 
occur  from  him,  if  you  consider  it  within  his  power?"  His 
reply  was :  "  Because  it  does  not  occur  until  misfortune 
comes  to  one,  and  it  is  impossible  for  misfortune  to  come 
upon  Allah."  They  said  to  him :  "  It  is  also  impossible  for 
him  to  have  power  over  what  takes  place  through  him,  ex- 
cept when  misfortune  comes  upon  him."  And  the  three 
were  amazed.  Bishr  said  to  them  that  everything  which  they 
held  was  nonsense.  Abu-al-Hudhail  replied :  "  And  what 
do  you  say?  Do  you  claim  that  Allah  is  able  to  torment  a 
child,  or  do  you  merely  say,  '  This  man  (i.  e.  al-Nazzam) 
holds  that  view'?"  He  replied:  "I  hold  that  Allah  has 
power  to  do  this."  And  he  said  :  "  If  he  does  that  which  he 
is  able  to  do,  namely  torment  a  child,  and  oppress  it,  then  the 
child  must  be  an  adult,  intelligent,  sinful,  and  deserving  of 
the  punishment  which  Allah  imposes  upon  it.  The  evidences 
in  themselves  would  be  evidences  of  his  justice."  Abu-al- 
Hudhail  said  to  him :  "  May  your  eyes  weep.  How  can  it 
be  an  act  of  virtue  not  to  do  what  you  can  do  along  the  line 
of  oppression?"  And  al-Mirdar  said:  "Verily  you  have 
denied  an  opinion  of  my  preceptor,  and  my  preceptor  was 
wrong."  Bishr  said  to  him:  "  How  do  you  say?"  And  he 
replied :  "  I  say  that  Allah  has  the  power  to  oppress  and  to 
lie,  and  if  he  does  this,  he  becomes  an  oppressive  and  a 
lying  God."  Bishr  then  said  to  him :  "  Does  he  deserve 
worship  or  not?  If  he  deserves  it,  then  worship  is  an  act 
of  praise  toward  the  worshipped,  and  if  he  practises  op- 
pression, then  he  deserves  blame  and  not  praise.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  he  does  not  deserve  worship,  how  can  he  be  a 
lord  without  it?" 

208 


THE  SECTS  OF  THE  MU'TAZILAH  AND  THE  KADARIYAH 

Al-Ashbah  said  to  them  :  "I  hold  that  Allah  has  the  power  jgg 
to  oppress  and  to  lie;  and  even  if  he  oppresses  and  lies,  he  is 
upright,  just  as  he  has  the  power  to  do  that  which  he  knows 
he  is  not  going  to  do.  If  x  he  does  it,  he  knows  he  will  do  it." 
Al-IskafI  said  to  him :  "  How  does  tyranny  change  into 
justice?"  And  he  replied:  "  What  do  you  say?"  And  he 
said :  "  I  hold  that  if  Allah  commits  tyranny  and  lying,  his 
act  does  not  exist,  for  it  is  done  to  an  insane  or  defective 
man."2  Ja'far  ibn-Harb  said  to  him:  "This  amounts  to 
saying  that  Allah  has  the  power  to  oppress  the  insane,  but 
no  power  to  oppress  the  wise/'  At  that  time,  the  people  dif- 
fered over  the  reason  for  the  different  opinion  held  by  each 
one  of  them.  And  when  the  turn  to  answer  came  to  al- 
Jubba'i  and  his  son,  they  refrained  from  answering  in  this 
matter,  with  advisedness.  One  of  the  followers  of  abu- 
Hashim  does  not  mention  this  question  in  his  book.  And  he 
said :  "  If  we  are  asked, '  Can  what  Allah  is  able  to  do  in  the 
line  of  oppression  and  lying  occur?'  we  reply,  'This  can 
occur,  because  if  its  occurrence  were  not  possible,  he  would 
have  no  power  over  it,  because  power  over  the  impossible  is 
an  impossibility.'  And  if  he  says,  '  Is  such  an  occurrence 
from  Allah  possible  ?'  we  answer,  '  Its  occurrence  through 
him  is  not  possible,  because  of  the  hatef ulness  of  such  a  deed, 
the  fact  that  Allah  can  do  without  it,  and  that  he  knows  he 
can/  If  one  says,  '  Tell  us  if  his  ability  to  oppress  and  lie  is 
applied,  what  would  be  his  own  condition?  Does  the  occur- 
rence of  his  oppression  prove  his  ignorance  or  his  need?'', 
we  say,  *  This  is  impossible  because  we  have  known  him  to 
be  wise  and  rich.'  And  if  he  says,  '  If  oppression  and  lying 
come  from  him,  is  it  then  possible  to  say  that  this  does  not  189 
prove  his  ignorance  or  his  need  ?',  we  then  say,  '  he  cannot 

1  'alima  inserted  here  is  a  corruption  of  the  text. 

2  A  lie  to  an  insane  man  is  not  considered  a  lie. 

209 


MOSLEM  SCHISMS  AND  SECTS 

be  described  in  this  manner  because  we  know  that  oppression 
proves  the  ignorance  of  its  author  or  his  need.'  And  if  he 
then  says,  '  Indeed,  you  do  not  answer  the  question  asked 
of  you  regarding  the  evidence  of  the  occurrence  of  oppres- 
sion and  lies  through  him  who  is  ignorant  and  needy,  either 
by  yes  or  no,'  we  say,  '  So  you  say  '."  These  leaders  of  the 
Kadariyah  of  our  age  acknowledge  their  inability,  and  the 
inability  of  their  predecessors,  to  answer  this  question.  If 
they  should  succeed  in  finding  out  the  truth  about  it,  they 
would  accept  the  view  of  our  followers  that  Allah  has 
power  over  everything  subject  to  power,  and  that  every- 
thing which  is  subject  to  his  power,  if  it  comes  from  him,  is 
not  tyrannical  on  his  part.  And  if  they  consider  it  impos- 
sible for  him  to  lie,  as  our  companions  did,  they  would 
escape  from  the  conclusions  which  were  advanced  against 
them  in  this  matter.  One  of  the  excuses  given  by  al-Jubba'i 
for  not  being  able  to  answer  this  question  by  yes  or  no  was 
something  like  this:  If  someone  were  to  say:  Tell  me 
about  the  Prophet,  if  he  lied,  would  that  be  or  would  it  not 
be  a  proof  that  he  was  not  a  prophet  ?  He  claimed  that  the 
answer  to  this  was  impossible.  This  is  private  guess  on  his 
part.  As  for  the  Sunnites,  they  hold  to  the  principle  that 
the  prophet  was  free  from  lying  and  oppression,  and  had 
no  power  to  perform  them.  And  the  Mu'tazilah,  aside  from 
al-Nazzam  and  al-Aswari,  ascribed  to  Allah  the  power  to 
oppress  and  lie.  And  they  had  to  find  an  answer  for  the 
question  of  him  who  asked  them  about  the  occurrence  of 
those  things  subject  to  his  power  that  came  from  them 
(lying  and  oppression)  if  they  were  a  proof  of  ignorance 
and  need  or  not,  by  yes  or  no.  Whoever  of  them  tries  to 
answer  this,  belies  their  principles  in  his  answer.  And 
praise  be  to  Allah  who  saved  us  from  this  heresy  of  theirs 
which  leads  to  such  contradictions. 

210 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Many  of  the  numerous  Arabic  works  on  the  religion  of  Islam  have 
come  down  to  us  only  as  titles.  Among  the  most  important  on  the 
great  question  of  sects  are  the  following: 

Al-Subkl,  in  his  Tabakdt  al-Shdfi'iyah  (ed.  Cairo  1324  A.  II.,  vol.  i, 

pp.  252,  288 ;  vol.  ii,  p.  171 ) ,  mentions  these  Shaf i'i  writers  on  this  subject : 

Ilusain   ibn-'Ali    ibn-YazId   abu-'Ali  al-Karabisi    (245/859),    one    of 

those  best  versed  in  the  teachings  of  the  heretics. 
Muhammad  ibn-Ahmad  ibn-Nasr  abu-Ja'far  al-Tirmidhi,   versed   in 
theology  and  tradition,  wrote  a  work  on  the  Fundamental  Dif- 
ferences of  the  People  of  Prayer. 
Abul-Fadl  al-Balami  (329/941),  wrote  essays  on  this  subject. 
In  verse : 
'Abdallah  ibn-Muhammad  al-Nashl   (293/906)   wrote  four  thousand 
verses   on  philosophy   and   religious   systems,   sects   and   beliefs 
(Mas'udi,  Les  Prairies  d'Or,  vol.  vii,  p.  89). 

Among  the  earliest  polemical  writers  are : 

Abu-'All  Ahmad  ibn-'Umar  ibn-Rustah  (d.  360  A.  H.)  who  wrote  a 
chapter  on  Arts  and  Religions  of  Arabs  before  Islam  and  the 
Schools  in  Islam.  Bibliotheca  Geographic orttm  Arabicorum,  vol. 
vii,  pp.  214-229  (sects  on  p.  217). 

Abu-Mansur  'Abd  al-Kahir  ibn-Tahir  ibn-Muhammad  al-Baghdadi 
(d.  329/1037).    (A  list  of  his  important  works  is  given  elsewhere.) 

Shuhfur  ibn-Tahir  ibn-Muhammad  al-Isfaraini  (d.  1078).  His  manu- 
script in  Berlin  is  practically  a  copy  of  Baghdadi's  work. 

Abu-Muhammad  'All  ibn-Ahmad  ibn-Hazm  (456/1064).  Kitdb  al- 
Milal  wa'l-Nihal  (a  book  on  differences  and  sects).  Published  in 
Cairo,  with  Shahrastani's  work  printed  on  the  margin. 

Abu'1-Fath  Muhammad  al-Shahrastani.  Religious  Sects  and  Philoso- 
phical Schools,  translated  by  Haarbriicker  (Halle  1850). 

This  literature  having  reached  its  height  with  Shahrastani,  we  will 
not  mention  here  the  numerous  treatises  which  have  appeared  since. 
Of  the  above-mentioned  works,  one  only  is  available  in  translation :  that 
of  Shahrastani,  Religions-Partheien  und  Philosophen-Schulen,  trans- 
lated by  Haarbriicker.  Parts  of  ibn-^azm  may  be  found  translated  by 
Prof.  Friedlander,  in  the  J.  A.  O.  S.,  vols,  xxviii  and  xxix. 

211 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  most  important  works  on  this  subject  by  European  scholars  are 
the  following: 

E.  Blochet: 

Le  Messianisme  dans  l'heterodoxie  Musulmane,  Paris,  1903. 

A.  Christensen : 
Remarques  critiques  sur  le  Kitdb  baydni-l-adydn  d'Abii-l-Ma'ali;  in 
Le  Monde  Oriental,  vol.  v,  191 1,  pp.  205  et  seq. 

Israel  Friedlander: 

The  Heterodoxies  of  the  Shiites,  J.  A.  O.  S.,  vols,  xxviii  and  xxix. 
This  article  includes  his  translation  of  portions  of  ibn-Hazm. 
(New  Haven,  Conn.,  1907.) 

Ignaz  Goldziher: 
Beitrdge   zur   Literaturgeschichte   der   Shi'a    und    der    Sunnitischen 

Polemik  (in  Akad.  der  Wiss.  Phil.  Hist,  klasse.  Sit  sung sb.,  vol. 

lxxviii,  pp.  439-524.)      (Vienna.) 
Die  Zahiriten  (Leipzig,  1884). 
Le  Denombrement  des  Sectes  Mahometanes,  in  Revue  de  I'Histoire 

des  Religions,  vol.  xxvi  (Paris,  1892). 
Review   of    Baghdadi's   work,    Zeitschrift   der   Deutschen   Morgen- 

landischen  Gesellschaft,  vol.  lxv,  p.  349. 
I'orlesungen  iiber  den  Islam   (Heidelberg,   1910).     (Translated  into 

English,  Mohammed  and  Islam,  New  Haven,  Conn.,  1917.) 

Hammer-Purgstall : 

Tableau  Genealogique  des  73  sectes  de  VI slam,  in  Journal  Asiatique, 
1st  ser.,  vol.  vi,  pp.  321-335;  vol.  vii,  pp.  32-46. 

M.  Horten: 
Die  Philosophischcn  Systeme  der  Spekulativcn  Theologen  im  Islam 
(Bonn,  1912). 

S.  Horovitz: 

Uber  den  Einfluss  der  Griechischen  Philosophic  auf  die  Entwicklung 

der  Kalam  (Breslau,  1909). 
Uber  den  EinHuss  des  Stoicismus  auf  die  Entzvicklung  der  Philosophic 

bei  den  Arab  em,  Z.  D.  M.  G.,  vol.  lvii,  pp.  177- 191. 

J.  B.  L.  J.  Rousseau : 

Memoires  sur  les  trois  plus  fameuses  sectes  du  Musuhnanisme  (Paris, 
A.  Nepven,  1818,  ed.  75,  p.  80). 
212 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Martin  Schreiner : 

Der  Kaldm  in  der  Judischen  Literatur,  Revues  des  Etudes  JuivA 
vol.  xxix,  p.  211   (Paris,  1894). 

Beitrdge  zur  Geschichte  der  Theologischen  Bewegungen  im  Islam, 
Z.  D.  M.  G.,  vol.  Hi,  p.  463  and  vol.  liii,  p.  51. 

Zur  Geschichte  des  Asa' rite ntums,  Actes  du  Troisieme  Congres  In- 
ternationale des  Orientalistes,  sec.  i  vol.  i,  p.  77  (Leiden,  1891). 

M.  Steinschneider : 

Die  kanonische  Zahl  der  Muhammedanischen  Secten.  und  die  Sym- 
bolik  der  Zahl  70-73,  Z.  D.  M.  G.,  vol.  iv,  p.  145. 

J.  Wellhausen: 
Religios-Politischen     oppositions-parteien     im     alien     Islam.      Kon. 
Gesellschajt  d.   Wissensch.  Gottingen,  p.  99.     Abhandl.  Philol- 
Hist.  Klasse,  N.  F.,  vol.  v,  no.  2  (Berlin,  1901). 

Wiistenfeld : 
Der  Imam  al-Schdii'i  und  seine  Anh'dnger.  Abhandlungcn  der  Gesell- 
schajt der  Wissenschaftefi,  vols,  xxxvi,  xxxvii  (Gottingen,  1891). 
213 


INDEX 


Abadlyah,  36 

*  Abdallah  ibn-al-IJasan  ibn-al-Hu- 

sain,  63 
'Abdallah  ibn-al-Wadin,  84 
'Abdallah  ibn-abl-Aufl,  33 
•Abdallah    ibn-Harath    al-Khuzai, 

85 

'Abdallah  ibn-al-Zubair,  52,  59,  85, 

"5 

'Abdallah  ibn-'Amr,  21 
'Abdallah  ibn-'Amr  ibn-al-'As,  22 
'Abdallah  ibn-'Amr  ibn-Harb,  49 
'Abdallah  ibn-Dajah,  58 
'Abdallah  ibn-Hammad  al-Jubari, 

80 
'Abdallah  ibn-Hubab  ibn-al-'Aratt, 

77,  78 
'Abdallah-ibn-Ibad,  104,  107 
'Abdallah  ibn- Ja' far,  71 
'Abdallah  ibn-Jausha  al-Ta'i,  82 
'Abdallah  ibn-Kauwa,  77 
'Abdallah  ibn  -  Maimun  al-Kadah, 

35 
'Abdallah  ibn- Muslim- ibn -Kutai- 

bah,  156,  179 
'Abdallah  ibn-Muti'  al-'AdawI,  52 
'Abdallah  ibn-Najiyah,  21 
'Abdallah  ibn  'Umar,  33 
'Abdallah  ibn-Wahab  al-Rasibi,  77, 

80  ff.,  92 
'Abdallah  ibn-Yazid,  21 
'Abdallah  ibn-Yazid  al-Ansari,  52 
'Abd-al-Ghaffar  al-Faris,  8 
'Abd  al-Kahir,   5,  7,  8,  9,   12,  22, 

45-7,  50,  61,  73,  94,  108,  115,  132, 

175 
'Abd  al-Kais,  125 
'Abd-al-Karim  ibn-'Ajrad,  94,  96, 

IQ2 


'Abd-al-Malik  ibn-Marwan,  54,  59, 

86,  88,  91,  112,  113 
'Abd-al-Rahman  (bro.  of  'A'ishah), 

115 
'Abd-al-Rahman  al-Nisaburi,  101 

'Abd-al-Rahman   ibn -Muhammad 

ibn-al-Ash'ath,  113 
'Abd-al-Rahman  ibn-Muljim,  64, 

93,  106 
'Abd    al-  Rahman   ibn  -  Ziyad   ibn 

An'am,  21 
'Abd  al-Wahid  ibn-Ziyad,  35 
'Abd-Rabbihi  al-Kablr,  84,  87 
'Abd  Rabbihi  al-Saghir,  84,  87 
Abraham,  31,  151 
'Abs,  54 
Abstainers  (from  war),  84,  88,  98 

ff.,  101 
al-Abtar,  45 
abu-'Abdallah,   see   al-Hasan   ibn- 

Salih  ibn-Hal  al-Kufi 
abu-al-'Abbas  al-Kalanisi,  165 
abu-al-Hudhail  Muhammad  ibn-al- 
Hudhail  al-'Allaf,  68,  107,  125  ff., 
148,  165,  173,  207  ff. 
abu-al-Husain  al-Khaiyat,   see  al- 

Khaiyat 
abu-al-Ruwandl,  147 
abu-Baihas,  91 

abu-Baihas  Haisam  ibn-'Amir,  no 
abu-Bakr,  31-3,  45,  46,  50,  106.  109 
abu-Bakr  al-Siddik,  see  abu-Bakr 
abu-Bakr   Muhammad   ibn-al-Tai- 

yib  al-'Ash'ari,  138 
abu-Bilal  Mirdas  al-Khariji,  92 
abu-Fudaik,  90  ff. 
abu-Hanifah,  28,  39,  *53 
abu-Hashim  ibn-al-Jubba'l,  37,  "6, 

118,  133.  165,  184,  190  ff.,  209 
abu-Hurairah,  21,  22,  33,  154 
215 


2l6 


INDEX 


abu- Imam  ah,  22 

abu  -  Hashim    'Abdallah  ibn  -  Mu- 
hammad ibn-al-Hanifiyah,   see 

Muhammad  ibn-al-Hanaflyah 
abu-'Isa  al-Warrak,  68,  71 
abu-Ishak,  see  al-Murtar 
abu-Ishak  al-Isafaraini,  8 
abu-Ishak  Ibrahim  ibn-Saiyar,  see 

al-Nazzam 
abii-Ja'far  al-Mansur,  62 
abu-Kamil,  36,  60 
abu-Karib  al-Darir,  48 
abu-Kasim  'Abdallah  ibn -Ahmad 

ibn-Mahmiid  al-Banahi  al-Ka'bi, 

see  al-Ka'bi 
abu-Kubais,  68 
abu-Kudail  (probably  abu-Fudaik), 

87  k. 
abii'l-Darda,  22 
abu'l-Jarud,  43 
abu  -  1  -  Hasan  al  -  Ash'arl,  see  al- 

Ash'ari 
abu-1-Julandi,  99 
abu-1- Sahara,  ill 
abu-1-Shamrakh,  91 
abu-Malik  al-Hadraml,  71 
abu-Maryam  al-Sa'di,  82 
abu-Mas'ur,  155  fif. 
abu  -  Muhammad    'Abdallah    ibn- 

'All   ibn-Ziyad   al-Sumaidhi,   see 

ibn-Ziyad 
abu  -  Muhammad     'Abdallah    ibn- 

'Umar,  22 
abu-Muhammad  ibn-'All  ibn-'Ab- 

dallah  ibn-'Abbas  ibn-al-Mutta- 

lib,  49 
abu-Mukarram,  104 
abu-Musa  al-'Ash'ari,  33,  146,  152 
abu-Musa  al-Murdar,  see  al-Mur- 

dar 
abu-Muslim,  103,  104 
abu-Rashid,  83 
abii-Sahl   Bishr  ibn    Ahmad   ibn- 

Bashhar    al  -  Isfara'ini,    see    al- 

Isfara'lnl 
abii-Salman,  21 
abu-Sa'ld  al-Khidrl,  22 
abu-Shimr  al-Murji',  37,  165 
abu  -  Yahya  Yusuf  ibn  -  Bashshar, 

see  ibn-Bashshar 


abu  -  Ya'kub  al  -  Shahham,  see  al- 
Shahham 

abu-Yusuf,  177 

abu-Zufar,  172 

Adam,  56 

al-'AdawI,  122 

'Adi  ibn-Hatim  al-Ta  i,  78 

Adlmawat,  the  people  of,  22 

Adnaniyah,  182 

Ahl  al-Zahir,  39 

Ahmad  ibn-al-Hasan  ibn-'Abd  al- 
Jabbar,  21 

Ahmad  ibn-Fihr,  180 

Ahmad  ibn-Nasr  al-Marwazi,  179 

Ahmad  ibn-Shumait,  57,  58 

al-Ahnaf  ibn-Kais,  57 

al-Ahwaz,  85  ff.,  121 

'Ailan,  54 

'A'ishah,  115,  122,  124 

Ajaridah,  36,  75,  94,  96,  98 

'Akabah,  night  of,  154 

al-'Akhnas,  103 

'Akhnasiyah,  102,  103 

'All,  5,  6,  22,  30,  33  ff.,  36,  43  fi\, 
48  ff.,  60  ff.,  64,  66,  75  ff-,  8o,93, 
95,  106,  122  ff.,  154,  170 

'All  al-Aswarl,  see  al-Aswarl 

'All  ibn  abi-Talib,  see  'All 

'All  ibn  -  Ahmad  ibn  -  Sa'id  ibn- 
Hazm  ibn-Ghalib  ibn-Salih  abu- 
Muhammad,  see  ibn-Hazm 

'All  ibn-al-Husain  Zain  al-'Abidln, 
49,  64  _ 

'All  ibn-'Isa  ibn-Hadiyan,  100 

'All  ibn-Maitham,  71 

'All  ibn-Musa  al-Rida,  66 

'All  Zararah  ibn-A'yan,  71 

'Amariyah,  60 

'Amir  ibn-Wathilah  al-Kinanl,  59 

'Amariyah,  36 

'Amr  ibn-al-'Asi,  33,  80,  146 

'Amr  ibn  -  Bahr  al  -  Jahiz,  see  al- 
Jahiz 

'Amr  ibn-Harmiiz,  124 

'Amr  ibn-.Sa'id,  99 

'Amr  ibn-'Ubaid  ibn-Bab,  34,  121, 
122,  123  ff. 

'Ammar  ibn-Yasir,  123 

'Amr  ibn-Yazid  al-Azdi,  99  ff. 

'Amriyah,  37,  116,  123 


INDEX 


217 


Amwariyah,  37 

Anas  ibn-Malik,  22,  33 

al-Anbar,  82 

Arabs,  28,  109,  182  ff. 

Aristotle,  183 

Armenia,  54 

'Asa,  168 

al-Asamm,  119,  170 

A'sha,  58 

Ashab  al-Makalat,  206 

Ashab  Ta'ah,  36,  105,  107 

(abu-1-Hasan) 
al-'Ash'ari,  8,  45,  71,  75,  76,   138, 

165,  189 
al-Ashhab  ibn-Bishr  al-'Urani,  82 
al-Ashbah,  209 
'Ashras  ibn-'Auf,  82 
'Asiyah,  168 
Asma    ibn-Kharijah,  56 
al-Aswad  ibn-Zaid  al-'AnasI,  32 
al-Aswarl,  137,  207,  210 
Aswariyah,  1 16 
'Atawlyah,  88 
'Atiyah    ibn-al-Aswad    al-Hanafl, 

87  ff-,  94 
'Attab  ibn-Warka'  al-Tamimi,  113 
'Aufiyah,  in 
al-Auza'I,  22,  39 
Azarikah,  36,  82-4,  86  ff.,  91,   III, 

119  ff.,  135,  195 
al-Azd,  57,  86 


B 

Badr,  battle  of,  69,  170 

Baghdad,  66 

al-Baghdadi,  see  'Abd  al-Kahir 

Baghdadiyun,  187 

Bahshamiyah,  37,  116,  190 

Baihasiyah,  92,  99,  noff. 

al-Bakir,  64,  65 

Bakr,  35,  54 

Bakriyah,  38,  41 

Bakiriyah,  35,  36 

Banu-l-'Abbas,  103 

Banu-Azd,  124 

Banu-Dabbah,  124 

Banu  Hanlfah,  58 

Banu  Isra'il,  see  Jews 


Banu-Khuza'ah,  180 
Banu-Kinanah,  182 
Banu  Kuraizah,  80 
Banu-Shaiban,  112  ff.,  113 
BanQ-Tamim,  123 
Banu  Umaiyah,  46,  104 
Banu  Yashkur,  76 
Bashhar  ibn-Burd,  60,  61 
al-Basrah,  34,  56,  57,  62,  78,  85  ff., 

91  ff.,  115,  120,  136,  154 
Basriyah,  139 
Basriyun,  186  ff. 
Batiniyah,  29,  35,  65,  66 
Battle  of  the  Camels,  48,  78,  122  ff. 
Bayan  ibn-Sim'an,  49 
Bayaniyah,  29,  36,  49 
Bishr  ibn-Marwan,  112 
Bishr  ibn-al-Mu'tamar,  134,  162  ff., 

165,  173,  207 
Bishriyah,  116,  162 
Buddhism,  12 
al-Bukhari,  45 
Burghunlyah,  37 
Burhanite  Dualists,  141 
Bushanj,  100 
Bust,  101 
Butriyah,  35,  45 
Buwaihids,  190 


Cairo,  13 

Christians,   12,  21,  79,   130,   147  ff., 

172  ff.,  178,  189 
Companions,  22,  60,  61,  65,  153,  155, 

157,  161 
Cordova,  11 


Dahhakiyah,  no 
Dahrl,  129  ff. 
Dahrlyah,  125  ff.,  178 
Darar,  32 

Darar  ibn-'Amr,  35 
Dararlyah,  30,  35,  169 

(Dirarriyah,  38,  41) 
al-Dhar,  59 
al-Dhimmlyah,  190 
Dhi  Salam,  56 


218 


INDEX 


Dhubyan,  54 
Dhul-Nunain,  50 
Dhu'l-Thudyah,  77,  81 
Dualists,  136,  141  ff. 
al-Dujail  (Little  Tigris),  114 
Dulab  al-Ahwaz,  77,  85,  86 
Duwaibivah  ibn-Wabrah  al-Bajadl, 
80 


Fadak,  32 

Fadl  al-IJadathi,  137 

al-Faiyad  ibn  Khali  al-Azdi,  80 

Fakhr  al-Din  al-Razi,  8 

Faljard,  99 

Faruk,  50 

Farwah  ibn-Naufal  al-Ashja'i,  82 

Fatimah,  154 

Followers  of  the  Camel,  33,  75,  78, 

81,  122  ft. 
Followers  of  Obedience,  see  Ashab 

Ta'ah 
Friedlander,  7,  11 
al-Futl,  see  Hisham  ibn-'Amr 

G 

Gabriel,  27 

Ghailan  al-Dimashki,  33,  119 

Ghalafah  al-Taiml,  82 

Ghassaniyah,  37 

Ghazalah,  1 12-15 

al-Ghazzal,  see  Wasil  ibn-'Ata* 

Ghulat,  5,  34-36,  49^  55,  65,  75,  97, 

105,  116 
Greeks,  12,  32 

H 

Habib  ibn-'Asim  al-'Audl,  81 
Hafs  ibn-abi-i-Mikdam,  105 
llafsiyah,  36,  105 
Haisam  al-Shari,  100 
al-Haitham  ibn-Kharijah,  21 
Hajir,  Mt.,  62,  63 
al-Hajjaj  ibn-Yiisuf,  86  n\,  112  flf. 
Hakakiyah,  38 
al-Hakam  ibn-al-'Asi,  154 
Halula,  Fort  of,  112 
Haluliyah,  36 


Hamadhan,  45,  54,  58,  77 

riammad  'Ajrad,  61 

Hamran  Kaumat,  35 

Hamzah  ibn-Akrak  al-Khariji,  97, 

98  ff. 
Hamzlyah,  36,  g6,  98 
Hanbalite,  6 
Hanifite,  6 
Harbiyah,  49 

Harithah  ibn-Badr  al-Fadanl,  85 
Harith  ibn-Mazid  al-Ibadi,  106  ff. 
al-Harith  ibn-'Umair,  112 
Harithiyah,  36,  105  ff. 
Harjarayah,  82 
al-Harrah,  46 
Harun  al-Rashid,  99,  177 
Harura,  77 
Harurlyah,  77,  112 
al-Hasan  al-Basrl,  34,  119,  121 
al-Hasan   ibn-'Ali,  43,  44,  47,  48, 

57,  64,  123 
al-Hasan   ibn-Salih  ibn  -  IJai  al- 

Kufi,  45 
Hashim  al-Aukas,  124 
Haushah,  124 
Hautharah    ibn-Wada'   al  -  'Asadl, 

82 
Hayitiyah,   116,  37? 
Hazzan,  54 
al-Hijaz,  28,  52 
Himariyah,  37,  116 
Himrun,  63 
Hindu,  12 
Hirat,  99  ff. 

Hisham  ibn-'Abd  al-Malik,  35,  46 
Hisham  ibn-'Amr  al-Futi,  165  ff. 
Hisham  ibn  -  al  -  Hakam  al-Rafidi^ 

36,  67-71,  73,  136,  144 
Hisham  ibn-Salim  al-Jawaliki,  36, 

67,  7o,  71,  73 
Hisham    ibn  -  'Ubaidallah    al-Razi, 

177 
Hishamlyah,  36,  60,  67,  116,  165 
Holy  Land,  31 

al-Hudaibiyah,  day  of,  79,  154 
Hudhaillyah,  37,  116,  125 
Hurairlyah,  35 
al-Husain   ibn    'All,   43,   44,   46-8, 

52-4,  58,  59,  64,  123 


INDEX 


219 


al-K[usain    ibn-Numair    al-Sukuti, 

9,  52,  54 
Hurkus  ibn  -  Zuhair  al  -  Bajall  al- 

'Urani,  77,  80,  81,  92 


'Ibad  ibn-Akhdar  al-Tamlml,  93 
Ibadiyah,  29,  81,  104  ff.,  106  ff.,  109, 

120,  129 
al-Iskafl,  209 
Ibn-' Abbas,  33,  59,  123 
Ibn-'Abbad,  190 
ibn-abl-al-Salt,  98 
ibn-abi-Daud,  179  ff. 
ibn-al-Hanafiyah,  see  Muhammad 

ibn-al-Hanafiyah 
ibn-al-Ikhshid,  200 
ibn  -  al  -  Jubba'i,  see  abu  -  Hashim 

ibn-al-Jubba'i 
ibn-al-Rawandi,  68 
ibn-al-Salah,  7 
ibn-al-Zaiyat,  179  ff. 
ibn-Arwa.,  50 

ibn-Bab,  see  'Amr  ibn-Ubaid 
ibn-Bashshar  (abu-Yahya  Yusuf), 

47,  99 
ibn-Bassam,  182 
ibn-Hayit,  137 
ibn-Hazm,  5,  11,  12 
ibn-Khallikan,  7,  8 
ibn-Khuzaimah  ibn-Mudrakali  ibn- 

Ilyas  ibn-Mudhar,  182 
ibn  -  Mubashshir,    see   Ja'far   ibn- 

Mub  ash  shir 
ibn-Saba,  34 
ibn-Shihab,  55 
ibn-Yazid  ibn  Unais,  36 
ibn-Ziyad,  21,  52,  54,  83,  92 
Ibrahim,  109  ff. 
Ibrahim  ibn-'Abdallah,  62,  63 
Ibrahim   ibn-Malik   al-Ashtar,  53, 

54,  57 
Ibrahimlyah,  36,  no 
'Idhaj,  86 

Idris  ibn-'Abdallah,  62,  63 
Imamlyah,  5,  30,  34  ff.,  43,  44,  60, 

70,  72  ff. 
'Imran  ibn-Hittan  al-SadwtsI,  92  ft". 


al-'Irak,  46,  52,  54,  55,  86,  112,  152 
'Isa  ibn-Maryam,  31 
'Isa  ibn-Musa,  62,  63 
'Isa  ibn-Sabih,  see  Murdar 
'Isawiah,  27 
al-Isfara'ini,  8,  21 
Ishak  ibn-Suwaid  al-'Adawi,  122 
Ishakiyah,  38 
Ishmael,  31 

al-Iskafl  (Muhammad  ibn-'Abdal- 
lah), 137,  175  ff-,  209 
Iskafiyah,  116,  175 
Isma'il  ibn-Ja'far,  65 
Isma'll  ibn-'Abbas,  21 
Isma'iliyah,  5,  36,  60,  65 
Ispahan,  28 
Ithna  'Asharlyah,  see  Twelvers 


Jabir,  22 

Jabir  ibn-'Abdallah  al-Ansari,  33, 
65 

Ja'd  ibn-Dirham,  33 

Ja'far  al-Sadik,  66 

Ja'far  ibn-Harb,  125,  137,  173,  175, 
209 

Ja'far  ibn-Mubashshir,  173  ff. 

Ja'far  ibn-'Umar,  54,  65 

Ja'farlyah,  116,  173 

al-Jahiz,  68,  124,  137,  147,  153,  !79, 
180  ff. 

al-Jahiziyah,  37,  1 16,  180 

Jahm  ibn-Safvvan,  35,  37,  126  ff. 

Jahmlyah,  23,  30,  35,  37,  38,  41 

Jahzah,  182 

Jahziyah,  113,  114 

Jaml'  ibn-Jusham  al-Kindi,  80 

Janahiyah,  36 

Jaririyah,  44 

Jarudiyah,  35,  43-5 

al-Jazirah,  54,  81 

Jerusalem,  31 

Jesus,  189  (see  also  'Isa  ibn-Mar- 
yam) 

Jews,  12,  21,  22,  28,  130,  147  ff-,  l73 

Jiraft  Kirmln,  87 

Jiwaih  ibn-Ma'bad,  99 

al-Jubba'i,  1 18,  125,  133,  137,  165, 
183  ff.,  189  ff-,  209 


220 


INDEX 


Jubba  iyah,  37 

(Jubabiyah,  116) 
Juzajan,  47 


al-Ka'bi,  abu-Kasim  'Abdallah  ibn-  j 
Ahmad  ibn-Mahmud  al  Banahi,  j 
27,  28,   75,  76,   117,   118  ff.,    159, 

161,  180  ff.,  184,  186  ff. 
Ka'blyah,  37,  116,  186  ff. 
Kabul,  123 

Kadarites,  see  Kadariyah 
Kadariyah,  5,  22,  23,  33,  37-9,  41, 

72,  95,  96,  98  ff.,    116,   117,   121, 
124,    127,    133,    135,    137,    155  ff-, 

162,  176  ff.,  179,  183 
al-Kadisiyah,  32,  37,  63,  95-6,  156 
al-Kahdiyah,  71 

Kahistan,  98,  101 

Kahtaniyah,  182 

Kais,  54 

Kaisan,  48 

Kaisaniyah,  5,  34-6,  43,  47,  48,  51, 

58-6o,  73 
Kaisum  ibn-Salamah  al-Juhani,  80 
al-Kalanisi,  138 
Kamiliyah,  36,  60,  61 
al-Karablyah,  48 
Karbela',  47-9,  53,  64 
Karramiyah,  27,  35,  38,  41,  72 
Karukh,  100 
Kasim  al-Dimashki,  206 
Kaskar,  113 
Katadah,  22 

Katari  ibn-al-Fujaah,  86  ff. 
Kathir  al-Munauwa,  45 
al-Katif,  89 
Kati'iyah,  60,  66,  72 
al-Khaiyat  (abu-al-Husain),  126, 

128,  147,  166,  172,  184  ff. 
Khaiyatiyah,  37,  116,  184  ff. 
Khalaf,  97 
Khalaflyas,  97,  100 
al-Khalidi,  37,  119 
Khalid  ibn-' Abdallah,  21 
Kharijites,  see  Khawarij 
Khaulan,  54 
Khawarij,  5,  22,  23,  29,  30,  32,  34, 


36,  3$,  41,  46,  50,  74  ff-,  77,  80  ff., 
85  ff.,  88,  96,  97,  100,  104,  113  ft"., 
122,  128  ff.,  129,  137,  174,  197 

Khazimiyah,  36,  94  ff.,  98  ff. 

Khuraim  ibn-Fatik  al-Asadl,  113 

Khurasan,  27,  35,  38,  47,  98,   100, 
101 
(Khorasan),  86 

Kinaniyah,  182 

Kirman,  85,  87 

(Kurman),  97,  98,  101 

Kita'lyah,  36 

al-Kufah,  44,  46,  47,  52-8,  63,  77, 
80,  1 12-4,  154 

Kumis,  87 

Kuraib  ibn-Murrah,  83,  93 

Kuraish,  32 

Kuthaiyir,  49,  50 

M 

Ma'bad  al-Juhani,  33,  101,  119,  121 

Ma'badiyah,  36,  102,  103 

al-Madain,  52,  58,  82,  113 

al-Madaini,  183 

al-Madhar,  58 

]\ladhhij,  54 

al-Madinah,  31,  32,  46,  63,  64,  65, 

154,  177 
al-Ma'dumiyah,  185 
Maghrib,  62,  63 
Magians,    12,  22,   35,  37,   130,   147, 

173,  206 
Mahdi,  44,  49,  55,  59,  60,  62,  63,  65, 

66 
al-Mahin,  54 
Maimun,  96 

(not    leader   of    Maimuniyah, 
109 
Maimuniyah,  29,  36,  37,  75,  95,  no 
Majhuliyah,  36,  97 
Makrumiyah,  104 
Malik,  39,  177 
Malikite,  6 
Ma'lumiyah,  36,  97  ff. 
Mamturah,  66,  72 
al-Ma'mun   (caliph),  35,  101,   177, 

179 
Manicheans,  139,  145 


INDEX 


221 


al  -  Mansur,    see    abu  -  Ja'far    al- 

Mansiir 
Mansurlyah,  36 
Maradis  al-Kharijl,  76 
Marlslyah,  37 

Marwan  ibn-al-Hakam,  124 
Mary,  189 
Masldhan,  82 
Masma'  ibn-Kadali,  77 
Mas'ud  ibn-Kais,  100 
al-Mausil  (Mosul),  54 
al-Mawayini,  112 

Mecca,  28,  31,  48,  59,  62,  63,  68,  107 
Michael,  2.7 
Miklas  al-Azrak,  88 
Miilat*  al-Islam,  25,  27 
al-Mirdad,  125  ff.,  208 
Mu'adh  ibn-Jarir,  82 
Mu'ammar,   118  ff.,    124    137,   157, 

159  ff.,  202 
Mu'ammariyah,  116 
Mu'awiyah,  5,  33,  47,  65,  76,  79  #-, 

82,  122,  170 
Mu'awiyah  ibn  -  Ishak  ibn  -  Yazld 

ibn-IIarithah,  46 
Mubaraklyah,  36,  60,  66 
al-Mughlrah  ibn-Sa'Id  al-'Ijll,  62, 

63 
al-Mughlrah  ibn-Shu'bah,  82 
Mughlrlyah,  29,  36,  63 
Muhakkimah,  First,  36,  76,  81  ff., 

92 
al-Muhallab  ibn-abi-Sufrah,  57,  86 
Muhammad,  1,  6,  22,  23,  27-31,  59, 

62,  70,   79,  88,   140,   146  ff.,   154, 

156,  161,  179,  181 
Muhammad  Badr,  13 
Muhammad   ibn-'Abdallah   al  -  Is- 

kafi,  see  al-Iskafi 
Muhammad  ibn-'Abdallah   ibn-al- 

Hasan  ibn-'All  ibn-abi-Talib,  44, 

62,  63,  64 
Muhammad    ibn  -  al  -  Ash'ath    al- 

Kindl,  57,  58 
Muhammad  ibn-al-IIanafiyah,  35, 

48,  49,  5i,  52,  55,  59 
Muhammad  ibn-al-Hasan,  66,  I70ff. 
Muhammad  ibn-'All,  64 
Muhammad  ibn-al-Kasim,  44 


Muhammad  ibn-al-Nu'man  al-Ra- 

fidl,  72 
Muhammad  ibn-'Amr,  21 
Muhammad  ibn-Isma'il,  65,  66 
Muhammad  ibn  -  Ismail   al  -  Buk- 

hari,  see  al-Bukharl 
Muhammad  ibn  -  Shabib  al-Basrl, 

37-H9 
Muhammad  ibn-Tahir  ibn-'Abdal- 
lah ibn-Tahir,  35 
Muhammad  ibn-'Umar,  44 
Muhammadiyah,  35,  44,  60,  62,  64 
Mujassimah,  23,  27,  30 
Mukarramlyah,  36 
Mukarran,  97  ff. 
Mukassidun,  160 

al-Mukhtar  ibn-abi-'Ubaid  al-Tha- 
kafi  (known  also  as  abu-Ishak), 
47,  48,  51-8 
al-Murdar   (Isa  ibn  -  Sabih,  abu- 

Musa  al-Murdar),  171  ff.,  175 
Murdarlyah,  116,  170 
Murjiites,  see  Murjlyah 
Murjlyah,  5,  22,  37,  38,  41,  108 
Mus'ab  ibn-al-Zubair,  56-8 
Musa  ibn-Ja'far,  65,  66,  72,  73 
Musailamah,  32 
al-MusawIyah,  36,  60,  71 
Mushabbihah,  23 
Muslim  ibn-'Abs   ibn-Kuraiz   ibn- 

Hablb  ibn-'Abd-Shams,  85 
Muslim  ibn-Ahwaz  al-Mazini,  47 
Muslim  ibn-al-Hajjaj,  45 
Mustadrikah,  37 
al  -  Mustaurid    ibn  -  Alkamah    al- 

Tamlmi,  82 
al-Mu'tasim,  177 
Mutawakkil,  180 

Mu'tazilah,  5,  29,  34,  41,  106,  n6ff., 
119,  125  ff.,  131  ff-  135,  *37,  139, 
147  ff.,  149,  161  ff.,  166,  170  ff., 
176  ff.,  182,  184  ff.,  186  ff.,  191, 
201,  203,  205,  210 
al-Muttarih,  89 
Muwaislyah,  37,  116 


N 


Nabhan,  54 


222 


INDEX 


Nafi'  ibn-al-Azrak  al-Hanafi,  83  ff., 

86  ff. 
Nahawand,  32 
Nahd,  54 

al-Nahrawan,  battle  of,  77,  82 
Najadat,  36,  75,  76,  87,  91,  120,  174 
Najd,  63 

Najdah  ibn-' Amir  al-^anafl,  87-90 
Najjariyah,  23,  30,  34,  37,  41,  137, 

169 
Najran,  79 
Nisapur,  7 

(Nisabur),  101 
Nasr  ibn-al-Hajjaj,  154 
Nasr  ibn-Bashshar,  see  ibn-Bash- 

shar 
Nasr  ibn-Harimah  al-'Ansi,  46 
Nawisiyah,  35,  60 
al-Nazzam  abu-Ishak  Ibrahim  ibn- 

Saiyar,  70,  124,  135  ff-,  165,  I7h 

173,  175,  183,  186  ff.,  206  ff.,  210 
Nazzamlyah,  135  ff. 
Nizamlyah,  37 

(Nazzamlyah),  116 
al-Nu'at,  54 
al-Nukhailah,  82 


Persia,  36,  52,  85  ff. 

Persians,  32 

Prophet,  The,  see  Muhammad 


Radwa,  Mt.,  48,  50,  51 

Radwa,  Pass  of,  59 

Rafi  ibn-Laith  ibn-Nasr  ibn  -  Sai- 

yar,  101 
al-Rai,  34,  37,  87,  176 
al-Rashid,  65,  101,  104 
Rashidiyah,  36,  104 
Rashid  al-Tawil,  88,  90  ff. 
Rawafid,  23,  34-6,  38,  43,  47 
(Rafidiyah),  29,  39,  46,  71 
(Rafidah),  41,  55,  60,  61,  73, 

106,  170 
Rawandiyah,  49 
Ruh  Zinba',  112 
Rukanah  ibn-Wa'il  al-Arji,  80 


al-Ruwandi,  165 


Sabat  al-Madain,  34,  47 

Sabbabiyah,  34,  55,  64 

Sabur,  86 

Sa'd  ibn-abl-Wakkas,  32 

Sa'd  ibn-Kufr,  82 

Sa'd  ibn-Mu'adh,  80 

Sa'd  ibn-Mujalid  al-Saiba'l,  80 

Sa'd  ibn-'Ubadah  al-Khazraji,  32 

Safwan-Ansarl,  61 

Sahamiyah,  37 

Sa'Id  ibn-al-'Asi,  154 

Saiyid  al-Himyari,  50,  51 

Sajah,  32 

al-Salihi,  n8ff.,  184 

Salih  ibn-Mishrah  al-Khariji,  in 

Salih  ibn-Mishrah  al-Tamiml,  in 

Salihiyah,  in 

(Same  as  Khawarij  on  p.  113) 
Salih  Kubbah,  followers  of,  37,  116 
Salt  ibn-'Uthman,  98 
Saltlyah,  98 
Samaritans,  148 
Samarkand,  101 
Sammak  ibn-Harb,  45 
Sanan  al-Ju'fi,  47 
Satan,  61,  64 
Sawad  al-Kufah,  82 
Sha'bah,  100 
Shablb  ibn-YazId  al-Shaibani,  in 

ff. 
al-Shablblyah,  in,  115 
al-Shafi'l,  39,  153,  174  ff.,  177 
Shafi'ite,  6 
al-Shahham,  183  ff. 
al-Shahhamlyah,  116,  183 
Shahrastani,  5,  11,  35 
Shaiban  ibn  -  Salamah   al-Khariji, 

103 
Shaibaniyah,  103,  104 
Shaitan  al-Tak,  36,  71,  72 
Shaitanlyah,  36,  60,  72 
Shamltiyah,  60 
Sharikan,  28 
Sharikanlyah,  28 
Shibt  ibn-Rab'i,  77 


INDEX 


223 


Shiite,  1,  5,  6,^129,  137 
Shuaib,  96 
Shu'aiblyah,  36,  95 
Shuhfur  ibn-Tahir,  10 
Shumaitiyah,  36 
Shurah,  76 
Sifatiyah,  5,  184,  203 
Siffin,  33,  60,  76,  77,  122 
Sifriyah,  36,  ill,  120 

(See  Sufrlyah) 
Sijistan,  81,  88,  94,  98,  100,  101 
Sophists,  136 
Subkl,  7,  8 

Sufain  ibn-al-Abrad  al-Kalbi,  114 
Sufrlyah,  91  ff.,  112 

(See  Sifriyah) 
Sufyan  ibn^al-Abrad  al-Kalbi,  87 
Suhail  ibn-'Amr,  79 
Sulaiman  ibn-Jarir  al-Zaidi,  44,  45 
Sulaimaniyah,  35,  44,  45 
Sunnites,  1,  5,  6,  9,  23,  29,  94,  97, 

103,  i2£L  129,  135,  138,  171 
Surakah  ibn-Mirdas  al-Bariki,  56 
Syria,  32,  52,  90,  112,  170 


Tabaristan,  87 

Tahir  ibn-al-Husain,  101 

al-Ta'if,  59 

Taim  'Adi,  82 

Talakan,  44 

Talhah,  95 

Talhah  ibn-Fahd,  99,  122,  124 

Tall-Mauzan,  81 

Tamamiyah,  116 

Taraikiyah,  38 

Tarif,"  58 

Taumaniyah,  37 

Tauwaj,  93 

Tha'alibah,  102,  104 

Tha'alibah  Khawarij,  101 

Tha'labah  ibn-Mashkan,  102 

Thamamah  ibn-Ashras  al-Numairl, 

177  ff-,  181 
Thamamlyah,  177 
Thanawlyah,  12 
Thaubanlyah,  37 
al-Thaurl,  39 


Thu'al,  54 
Thumamiyah,  37 
Tigris,  62 
Tulaihah,  32 
Twelvers,  36,  60,  66 

U 

'Ubad  ibn-al-Husain  al-Haiti,  83 
'Ubad     ibn  -  Sulaiman      al  -  'Amrl 

CUmari?),  167  ft. 
'Ubaidallah    ibn-al-Hirr    al-Ju'afl, 

53,  57 
'Ubaidah  ibn-Hilal  al-Yashkuri,  87 
'Ubaidallah  ibn-Ma'mar  al-Taimi, 

57 . 
'Ubaidallah    ibn  -  Ziyad,    see    ibn- 

Ziyad 

'Ubaid  ibn-abi-1-Mukharik  al-Mu- 
tannabi,  113 

Ubai  ibn-Ka'b,  22 

Uhud,  170 

'Ukbah  ibn-' Amir  al-Juhanl,  33 

'Uman,  54,  81 

'Umar,  44,  45,  50,  106,  154 

'Umar  al-Faruk,  154 

'Umar  ibn-Sa'd,  53 

'Umarlyah,  37 

Ummat  al-Islam,  12,  27-32 

Urwah  ibn-Hudair,  76 

'Utbah  ibn-'Ubaid  al-Khaulani,  80 

'Uthman,  33,  45,  75,  8r,  95,  154,  l6f) 

'Uthman  ibn-'Affan,  88,  106 

'Uthman  ibn-Ma'mun,  86 

'Uthman  ibn-'Ubaidallah  ibn-Ma'- 
mar al-Tamlmi,  85  ff. 

W 

Wadi  al-Siba',  124 
Wahb  ibn-Baklyah,  21 
Wakifah,  36,  110 

(Wakifiyah),  119 
Walid  ibn-Maslamah,  22 
al-Walid  ibn-'Ukbah,  154 
Wasil  ibn-'Ata  al-Ghazzal,  34,  3S. 

119,  121  ff.,  170 
Wasillyah,  37,  Il6,  119 
al-Wasy,  50 


224 


INDEX 


al-Wathik,  177,  179 
Wathilah  ibn-al-Aska\  22 


Yahya  ibn-Aktham,  177 

Yahya  ibn-Zaid,  47 

Ya'kub,  46 

Ya'kubiyah,  45 

al-Yamamah,  88,  90 

al-Yaman,  52,  81,  90 

Ya'mur  ibn-'Ubaidallah  ibn  -  Ma'- 

mar  al-Maiml,  91 
Yazid  ibn-'Ali  ibn-al-Husain  ibn- 

'Ali  ibn-abi-Talib,  47,  48 
Yazid  ibn-al-Muhallab,  87 
Yazid  ibn-Asim  al-Muhadhi,  76 
Yazid   ibn-Mu'awiyah,  47,  48,   52, 

59,  92 
Yazidiyah,  29,  36,  37,  74,  105 
Yunus   ibn  -  'abd  -  al  -  Rahman    al- 

Kummi,  36,  66,  72 
Yunusiyah,  36,  37,  60,  72 
Yusuf  ibn-'Um-Thakafi,  46,  47 


al-Za'farani,  34 

Za'faraniyah,  37 

Zahaf  ibn-Rahar  al-Ta'i,  83,  93 

Zahiriyah,  148 

Zaid  ibn-'Ali  ibn  -  al  -  Hasan  ibn- 

'Ali  ibn-abi-Talib,  46 ' 
Zaid    ibn-'Ali    ibn-al-Husain    ibn- 

'Ali  ibn-abi-Talib,  35 
Zaidiyah,  5,  30,  34-6,  43,  45,  46,  53, 

60,  72,  73 
Zaranj,  100 
Zararah  ibn-A'yun,  36 
Zarariyah,  36,  60,  71 
Zindiks,  173,  177,  178 
Ziyad-ibn-'Abd-al-Rahman,  104 
Ziyad  ibn-Abihi,  82 
Ziyad  ibn-al-Asfar,  91 
Ziyad  ibn-Kharrash  al-'Ijli,  82 
Ziyadiyah,  104 
al-Zubair,  95,  122,  124 
Zur'ah  ibn-Muslim  al-'Amiri,  92 
Zurkan,  70 


COLUMBIA    UNIVERSITY   PRESS 

Columbia  University  in  the  City  of  New  York 


The  Press  was  incorporated  June  8,  1893,  to  promote  the  pub- 
lication of  the  results  of  original  research.  It  is  a  private  cor- 
poration, related  directly  to  Columbia  University  by  the  provis- 
ions that  its  Trustees  shall  be  officers  of  the  University  and  that 
the  President  of  Columbia  University  shall  be  President  of  the 
Press.  

The  publications  of  the  Columbia  University  Press  include  works  on  Biog- 
raphy, History,  Economics,  Education,  Philosophy,  Linguistics,  and  Lit- 
erature, and  the  following  series  : 

Adams  Lectures  Carpentier  Lectures 

Julius  Beer  Lectures  Hewitt  Lectures 

Blumenthal  Lectures  Jesup  Lectures 

Columbia  University  Contributions  to  Anthropology 

Columbia  University  Biological  Series 

Columbia  University  Studies  in  Cancer  and  Allied  Subjects 

Columbia  University  Studies  in  Classical  Philology 

Columbia  University  Studies  in  Comparative  Literature 

Columbia  University  Studies  in  English 

Columbia  University  Geological  Series 

Columbia  University  Germanic  Studies 

Columbia  University  Indo-Iranian  Series 

Columbia  University  Contributions  to  Oriental  History  and  Philology 

Columbia  University  Oriental  Studies 

Columbia  University  Studies  in  Romance  Philology  and  Literature 

Records  of  Civilization  :  Sources  and  Studies 

Catalogues  will  be  sent  free  on  application 


LEMCKE   &   BUECHNER,  Agents 

30-32  East  20th  Street,  New  York 


Columbia  University  Oriental  Studies 

Edited  by  RICHARD  J.  H.  GOTTHEIL 


Vol.  I.  The  Improvement  of  the  Moral  Qualities.  An  Ethical  Treatise 
of  the  Eleventh  Century  by  Solomon  Ibn  Gabirol.  By  Stephen  S. 
Wise,  Ph.D.    8vo,  cloth,  pp.  ix  +  117.    $1.25  net. 

Vol.  III.  Old  Babylonian  Temple  Records.  By  Robert  Julius  Lau, 
Ph.D.    8vo,  cloth,  pp.  xi  +  89  -f-  41.     Plates.     $2.50  net. 

Vol.  IV.  Sidon.  A  Study  in  Oriental  History.  By  Frederick  Carl 
Eiselen,  Ph.D.    8vo,  cloth,  pp.  vii  -f  172.     $1.50  net. 

Vol.  V.  History  of  the  City  of  Gaza  from  the  Earliest  Times  to  the  Pres- 
ent Day.  By  Martin  A.  Meyer,  Ph.D.  8vo,  cloth,  pp.  xiii  +  182. 
$1.50  net. 

Vol.  VI.     The   Bustan  Al-Ukul  by   Nathaniel  Ibn  Al-Fayyumi.     By 

David  Levine,  Ph.  D.    8vo,  cloth,  pp.  xvi  +  142  f  88.    $2.50  net. 
Vol.  VIII.     Sumerian  Records  from  Drehem.     By  William  M.  Nesbit, 

Ph.D.    8vo,  cloth,  pp.  xiv  -f-  91.     Plates  and  sign  list.     $1.50  net. 
Vol.  IX.    The  Evolution  of  Modern  Hebrew  Literature,  1850-1912.     By 

Abraham  Solomon  Waldstein,  Ph.D.    8vo,  cloth,  pp.  vii  +  127. 

$1.50  net. 

Vol.  X.  The  History  of  Tyre.  By  Wallace  B.  Fleming,  Ph.D.  8vo, 
cloth,  pp.  xiv  -h  165.     Map.    $1.50  net. 

Vol.  XI.     The  Problem  of  Space  in  Jewish  Medieval  Philosophy.     By 

Israel  Isaac  Efros,  Ph.D.    8vo,  cloth,  pp.  ix  +  125.    $1.50  net. 
Vol.  XII.     The  Yemenite  Manuscript  of  Pesahim  in  the  Library  of  Col- 
umbia University.     By  Julius  J.  Price,  Ph.D.    8vo,  paper.    $i;5o 
net.    In  press. 

Vol.  XIII.     Aram  and  Israel,  or  the  Aramaeans  in  Syria  and  Mesopotamia. 

By  Emil  G.  H.  Kraeling,  Ph.D.    8vo,  cloth,  pp.  xvi  +  154.    $1.50 
net. 

Vol.  XIV.  A  Sumero-Babylonian  Sign  List.  To  which  is  added  an 
Assyrian  Sign  List  and  a  Catalogue  of  Numerals,  Weights  and  Meas- 
ures used  at  various  periods.  By  Samuel  A.  B.  Mercer,  Ph.D.  4to, 
cloth,  pp.  xi  -h  244.     $6.00  net. 

Vol.  XV.  Moslem  Schisms  and  Sects  (Al-Fark  Bain  al-Firak).  Being 
a  History  of  the  Various  Philosophic  Systems  Developed  in  Islam. 
By  Abu  Mansur  abd  al-Kahir  ibn  Tahir  al-Baghdadi.  (d.  1037). 
Part  I.  Translated  from  the  Arabic.  By  Kate  Chambers  Seelye, 
Ph.D.     8vo,  cloth,  pp.  viii  -|-  224.     $2.00  net. 


COLUMBIA,  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

LEMCKE  &  BUECHNER,  Agents 
30-32  East  20th  Street  New  York 


Columbia   University   Contributions   to 
Oriental  History  and  Philology 

EDITED   BY 

RICHARD  J.  H.  GOTTHE1L  and  JOHN  DYNELEY  PRINCE 

No,  1.  Sumerian  Hymns.  From  Cuneiform  Texts  in  the 
British  Museum.  Transliteration,  translation  and  comment- 
ary. By  Frederick  A.  Vanderburgh,  Ph.D.,  Lecturer  in 
Semitic  Languages,  Columbia  University.  8vo,  pp.  xii  -f 
83.     Paper,  $1.00;  cloth,  $1.50  net. 

No.  2.    The  History  of  the  Governors  of  Egypt  by  Abu 

Muhammad  Ibn  Yusuf  Al-Kindi.     By  Nicholas  August 
Koenig,  Ph.D.     8vo,  paper,  pp.  33  -f  33.     $1.00  net. 

No.  3.  Assyrian  Primer.  Bn  Inductive  Method  of  Learn- 
ing the  Cuneiform  Signs.  By  J.  Dyneley  Prince,  Ph.D., 
Professor  of  Semitic  Languages,  Columbia  University. 
8vo,  paper,  pp.  58.     $1.00  net. 

No.  4.  The  Witness  of  the  Vulgate,  Peshitta  and  Septn- 
agint  to  the  Text  of  Zephaniah.  By  Sidney  Zandstra, 
Ph.D.     8vo,  paper,  pp.  52.     $1.00  net. 

No.  5.  Tiglath  Pileser  III.  By  Abraham  S.  Anspacher, 
Ph.D.     8vo,  cloth,  pp.  xvi  -f  72.     $1.25  net. 

No.  6.  Root-Determinatives  in  Semitic  Speech.  A  Con- 
tribution to  Semitic  Philology.  By  Solomon  T.  H.  Hur- 
witz,  Ph.D.  8vo,  pp.  xxii  +  113.  Cloth,  $1.50  net ; 
paper,  $1.00  net. 

No.  7.    Mnhammedan  Law  of  Marriage  and  Divorce. 

By  Ahmed  Shukri,  Ph.D.     8vo,  paper,  pp.  126.     $1.00  net. 
Out  of  print. 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

LEMCKE  &  BUECHNER,  Agcnti 
30-32  East  20th  Street  New  York 


Date  Due 

■*  a    % 

1 

ta*^» 

-******* 

>, 

____——.  i 

/^^y**^^^ 

1 

*-^ 

^^wlis^fipSP 

r£~ 

^ 

^■*-*«. 

•Hk 

f) 

4\  \%+ 


